I have been doing some research on several firewalls and have found conflicting reviews on which is best. Here is a short list of what I have found so far:
Sygate Pro
BlackICE
Outpost Pro
BitDefender Pro
PC-Cillin Internet Security 2004
I am wanting to make the move away from Symantec, but would like some user experiences on the products before I purchase.
Thanks for the reply - never tried Kerio, but I have ZAPro and had some problems with certain websites when using it... I believe it was either JAVA or ActiveX problems - can't recall...
Just keep in mind one thing - neither NAT or SPI make the device a firewall. SPI ensures that the traffic that is permitted in is the correct traffic. NAT and SPI are parts of many firewalls, but they do not make the device a firewall.
Isn't it wonderful what Marketing types and Sales people can do when they start playing with words to describe a product :)
Now, for the real info - if you get a router with NAT/SPI, it's a very nice start, in the old days I used NAT as a border defense method and additional protections inside the network, even with public facing services. During that time I ever found an uninvited quest connected to our systems, but, that was before people really started attacking the "routers". If you are going to get something with SPI, consider a Linksys, so that you can download the free WallWatcher software to track ALL in/out bound traffic - this will let you monitor what stations INSIDE your network are communicating with OUTSIDE resources, and it will also show you what outside resources are making connection attempts. It's a dang nice application - about a year ago he sent me the source code for it and I modified it to log all the traffic to a SQL server for reporting, dang nice chap.
I don't know if the Netgear works with WallWatcher, but Linksys was a number of "Firewall" named units (which are NAT/SPI) that you could pick from.
Just thought I would let you know that the FR114P is at the top of the WallWatcher Website as being supported (looks like the ONLY NetGear supported, btw...)
And since I design secure networks, manage secure networks, etc... all over the country I would say that my definition carries some weight with all of our virus free, uncompromised, protected clients. How many RP614's have you seen protecting businesses where they can state they've never been compromised? How many home users can state that they've never been compromised while using the RP614 (I know about 30 that have been compromised while using one - even with no port forwarding).
What are you saying, are you one of those marketers that claims anything that blocks anything for any reason is a fully functional firewall?
"K2NNJ" wrote in news:AHVNc.15311 $ snipped-for-privacy@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net:
One can call it what one wants. The RP614 cannot be called a true FW appliance. It's a simple as that. It doesn't meet the specs. It has FW like capabilities and nothing more. It doesn't take a rocket scientists to figure it out.
If the RP614 can meet the specs in the link below, then it is a FW appliance. The RP614 cannot meet the specs.
formatting link
No NAT router for home usage such as a RP614 is a FW appliance. It's plain and simple.
WallWatcher can be changed to add support for other Routers. The main requirement is that the Routers must send real-time log records to SysLog port 514 or SNMPTrap port 162. For more information, go to the WallWatcher website
formatting link
and find the section on "Adding support for other Routers."
Thanks Dan! Just wondering if you happen to know if the NetGear FVS318 does this or not. I can't seem to find any information on it on their website...
Dan - you are my hero. Back when I wanted to use WW (several years ago) with my BEFSR41 you sent me the code so that I could change it to log to my SQL server. You are a great person!
Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.