ZoneAlarm has a leak?

Kerio 2.1.5, not the latest version of Kerio. Just search in Google for the version I posted and you will find it.

I had considered Kerio but they indicate they will not be supporting this application any longer. What does this mean if they are number one?

Thanks for your reply.

Newbury

Why that specific version?

The people of Beyond are great ;-)

Do you know, that this is useless for security purposes?

If the router is filtering well.

Yours, VB.

I have removed ZoneAlarm Pro from all my systems and am running Windows XP firewall but the one thing that I liked the most is the ability to prevent applications from sending messages back to the SW people just as I install them. Many ask permission to communicate even if they are the simplest program. I also like to stop all activity with one click in my tray. I am not as concerned about anything getting in but what about getting in and out during an installation. What if I want to deny one system all access without re configuring my router each time?

Yours, VB.

If you want LOCAL control over your PC, while it's not perfect, if you install ZoneAlarm or Tiny or some other personal firewall app, you can get the control you want.

I know people that have run ZA and ZAP and Tiny for years without any issues, on 2000/xp, and have not been compromised even directly connected to their public IP without a router.

Find a stable version of ZA and use it if that's what you like.

I personally run a PFW on every laptop we take out of the office, so that we can keep them safe when on clients networks - but we also know how to not open holes that would compromise them under normal situations.

We also use Tiny as a way to test outbound connections when installing new applications, in addition to the firewall device itself.

That is how this thread started. I have been using ZA Pro for some years now. I get a report of a 'memory leak' each time I run Beyond TV application but nothing about how this would effect performance or operation in any way. The way I see it is when some new to me application is complaining of problems with my firewall I get a bit curious as every other application does not to be bothered and strange that they would have an issue with ZA enough to include this is an error report. I tend to want to stay with things the way they are before I start removing applications just because software wants access to 'trusted zones' according to firewall. What I don't like about zone Alarm is that every time you update they add more or different popup messages and you have to learn about what they mean all over again. How many people would remove a trusted firewall because of some SW like Beyond TV wants access to all the files all the time? Will Tiny be the same way? Should I allow Beyond TV access to whatever it needs to operate on my system?

This is how "Personal Firewalls" "work". Like every part of Metaphysics, you can believe in "Personal Firewalls" or not.

Perhaps "Personal Firewalls" better would be discussed on comp.metaphysics.firewalls, because this has nothing to do with security at all.

Yours, VB.

I would find another TV program, I would not accept that from a product

- unless the access was to the programs files only.

Tiny is not user friendly, it is a lot different than ZA, and I don't think Tiny is supported any longer (I could be wrong).

Ask yourself if you trust the software vendor and if you got it through non-hacker/hacked channels (meaning you're not running a pirated copy). If you say yes, then you must already trust it, so let it have access. Make a good back of your system first.

Yes, it does, and if you were not so obtuse you would know it.

Basically that is what I have been thinking. I get a report that an application I am installing, not only BTV but many, that internet access is requested or a red warning window from ZA tells warn me of a possible security risk. Usually I say no. BTV needs access to update my TV Guide section and my library section which is in my trusted zone. When it all gets right down to it one might as well let all installed applications access when they want it because if you are interested in privacy it is either to late or inevitable in the end. All you can do it play by the rules and never install pirate SW and hope for the best being at the mercy of even the upright SW people not to share your system information. (unlikely). Am I correct in the whole matter? I find myself spending way to much time on the updates of ZA to decipher their latest warning message also.

Newbury

It's not the known software apps that you really have to worry about ( most of the time ) it's the ones that you don't know about that cause the most problems. A PFW will alert you, many times, to a rogue app on your system that you might not have found normally or before X amount of time.

I personally disable the PFW when I'm inside our LAN, but we lock down our networks very tightly, so it's not like we're your typical home user.

If ZA works, use it, only update when you NEED the update, not just because there is an update, only allow things access outbound that you understand - and learn about those that you don't.