Free firewall for XP with outbound protection? Something compatiblewith Avast av and Spybot

Can anyone recommend free (for personal use) firewall software with
outbound "phone home" protection that is compatible with Avast! av and
Spybot? I used to use Zone Alarm and loved it; then I found it didn't
play nicely with other apps. Or it was user error on my part.

Evidently, the Windows XP firewall from Microsoft only provides
protection from inbound traffic.

On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:09:07 -0700 (PDT), mike <mikeerdas@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Can anyone recommend free (for personal use) firewall software with
>outbound "phone home" protection that is compatible with Avast! av and
>Spybot?

No. Because such protection is impossible already by design and
therefore cannot be implemented in any meaningful way. Better to
decide on whether you trust a program or not. And if not - don't even
start it.

>I used to use Zone Alarm and loved it; then I found it didn't
>play nicely with other apps. Or it was user error on my part.

Most likely it was both. Installing it in the first place was your
first error.

>Evidently, the Windows XP firewall from Microsoft only provides
>protection from inbound traffic.

Which happens to be a very clever design choice. Implementing reliable
outbound protection on a windows platform would require the
implementation of a complete security layer on top of it. I know you
can find "firewalls" that claim to do what you want - and if you're
willing to add big chunks of potentially vulnerable not too well
written code to your system with the sole purpose of adding numerous
gap stoppers, go ahead.

On Jun 20, 3:04*pm, Root Kit <b__n...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:09:07 -0700 (PDT), mike <mikeer...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Can anyone recommend free (for personal use) firewall software with
> >outbound "phone home" protection that is compatible with Avast! av and
> >Spybot?
>
> No. Because such protection is impossible already by design and
> therefore cannot be implemented in any meaningful way. Better to
> decide on whether you trust a program or not. And if not - don't even
> start it.
>
> >I used to use Zone Alarm and loved it; then I found it didn't
> >play nicely with other apps. Or it was user error on my part.
>
> Most likely it was both. Installing it in the first place was your
> first error.
>
> >Evidently, the Windows XP firewall from Microsoft only provides
> >protection from inbound traffic.
>
> Which happens to be a very clever design choice. Implementing reliable
> outbound protection on a windows platform would require the
> implementation of a complete security layer on top of it. I know you
> can find "firewalls" that claim to do what you want - and if you're
> willing to add big chunks of potentially vulnerable not too well
> written code to your system with the sole purpose of adding numerous
> gap stoppers, go ahead.

Ok, thanks.

In article <8276c761-0298-413d-b14f-
de9b8d77522a@e24g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>, mikeerdas@yahoo.com says...
>
> Can anyone recommend free (for personal use) firewall software with
> outbound "phone home" protection that is compatible with Avast! av and
> Spybot? I used to use Zone Alarm and loved it; then I found it didn't
> play nicely with other apps. Or it was user error on my part.
>
> Evidently, the Windows XP firewall from Microsoft only provides
> protection from inbound traffic.

Hi Mike,
I recommend you try Sygate Personal Firewall v5.5.2710.

http://www.oldversion.com/download_S...onal_Firewall_
5.5.2710.html
or
http://www.oldversion.com/Sygate-Personal-Firewall.html

Have used Sygate Pro for many years on my old Win98 and now on
my XP-h. It was compatible with Avast and I guess all of my
other apps. I set it up to block everything incoming/outgoing
that I do not use. It has an outstanding Traffic Log that
list everything incoming/attempted incoming and everything
outgoing/attempted outgoing. You can really see what is
going on in your maching.
Casey

On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 15:32:18 -0500, Casey <casey@invalid.address>
wrote:

>I recommend you try Sygate Personal Firewall v5.5.2710.

For what purpose would that be? - Because it cannot possibly be for
security reasons. SyGate is outdated. It's no longer supported. It has
unfixed flaws and it never worked as claimed.

>Have used Sygate Pro for many years on my old Win98 and now on
>my XP-h. It was compatible with Avast and I guess all of my
>other apps. I set it up to block everything incoming/outgoing
>that I do not use.

For you "running without too man issues" seems to be good enough. You
obviously never tested if it was actually able to work as claimed.

>It has an outstanding Traffic Log that
>list everything incoming/attempted incoming and everything
>outgoing/attempted outgoing. You can really see what is
>going on in your maching.

You seem happy with it. Malware you'd allow to run seem pretty happy
with it too.

In article <p54u35p227mf6kn8q00al9eor3chqk90v6@4ax.com>,
b__nice@hotmail.com says...
>
> On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 15:32:18 -0500, Casey <casey@invalid.address>
> wrote:
>
> >I recommend you try Sygate Personal Firewall v5.5.2710.
>
> For what purpose would that be? - Because it cannot possibly be for
> security reasons. SyGate is outdated. It's no longer supported. It has
> unfixed flaws and it never worked as claimed.
>
> >Have used Sygate Pro for many years on my old Win98 and now on
> >my XP-h. It was compatible with Avast and I guess all of my
> >other apps. I set it up to block everything incoming/outgoing
> >that I do not use.
>
> For you "running without too man issues" seems to be good enough. You
> obviously never tested if it was actually able to work as claimed.
>
> >It has an outstanding Traffic Log that
> >list everything incoming/attempted incoming and everything
> >outgoing/attempted outgoing. You can really see what is
> >going on in your maching.
>
> You seem happy with it. Malware you'd allow to run seem pretty happy
> with it too.

It would appear that you are not familiar with Sygate. There
is nothing to be upgraded. All parameters you need for a good
firewall are there.
1. Allow/Block-incoming/outgoing
2. Hosts-All/Specific/groups
3. Ports-local/remote
4. Protocols-UDP/ICMP/TCP
5. Applications/utilities
6 Stateful Packet inspection SPI monitors incoming packets
and the incoming packets are allowed to come on in if they
were initiated by your outgoing packets. All incoming
packets initiated by computers out on internet are blocked.

In my setup, I use 29 Advanced Rules which BLOCK EVERYTHING
I DO NOT USE.

Casey

On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 18:44:19 -0500, Casey <casey@invalid.address>
wrote:

>It would appear that you are not familiar with Sygate.

If only you were right. Unfortunately I *am* familiar with this piece
of "security" software written by programmers who couldn't even figure
out how to follow Microsoft's most basic security recommendations
regarding windows programming. For a company claiming to provide
security solutions that's embarrassing.

>There is nothing to be upgraded.

Are you saying it comes with an automatic bug fixer? - Whau!

>All parameters you need for a good firewall are there.
>1. Allow/Block-incoming/outgoing
>2. Hosts-All/Specific/groups
>3. Ports-local/remote
>4. Protocols-UDP/ICMP/TCP
>5. Applications/utilities
>6 Stateful Packet inspection SPI monitors incoming packets
> and the incoming packets are allowed to come on in if they
> were initiated by your outgoing packets. All incoming
> packets initiated by computers out on internet are blocked.

I'm not interested in what features it claims to provide. I'm
interested in whether these features are actually implemented in a
meaningful way and whether they work as advertised.

>In my setup, I use 29 Advanced Rules which BLOCK EVERYTHING
>I DO NOT USE.

You'd wish. Setup is one thing. Verifying whether this setup actually
works as expected is another. You seem to have missed that second
part. You're blinded by marketing hype.

In article <j8d945tedh6f259p8nqn487984dmdptl7i@4ax.com>,
b__nice@hotmail.com says...
>
> On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 18:44:19 -0500, Casey <casey@invalid.address>
> wrote:
>
> >It would appear that you are not familiar with Sygate.
>
> If only you were right. Unfortunately I *am* familiar with this piece
> of "security" software written by programmers who couldn't even figure
> out how to follow Microsoft's most basic security recommendations
> regarding windows programming. For a company claiming to provide
> security solutions that's embarrassing.
>
> >There is nothing to be upgraded.
>
> Are you saying it comes with an automatic bug fixer? - Whau!
No......
>
> >All parameters you need for a good firewall are there.
> >1. Allow/Block-incoming/outgoing
> >2. Hosts-All/Specific/groups
> >3. Ports-local/remote
> >4. Protocols-UDP/ICMP/TCP
> >5. Applications/utilities
> >6 Stateful Packet inspection SPI monitors incoming packets
> > and the incoming packets are allowed to come on in if they
> > were initiated by your outgoing packets. All incoming
> > packets initiated by computers out on internet are blocked.
>
> I'm not interested in what features it claims to provide. I'm
> interested in whether these features are actually implemented in a
> meaningful way and whether they work as advertised.
They work for me... In fact they have worked quite nicely
for me for about 6 or 8 years.
>
> >In my setup, I use 29 Advanced Rules which BLOCK EVERYTHING
> >I DO NOT USE.
>
> You'd wish. Setup is one thing. Verifying whether this setup actually
> works as expected is another. You seem to have missed that second
> part. You're blinded by marketing hype.
No I don't wish. I can verify what Sygate is doing by taking
a look at the excellent Traffic Log.

From your listed understanding of Sygate, you shouldn't
try to use it ---well guess you don't. You probably
couldn't get it set up if you tried.
Casey

On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:33:46 -0500, Casey <casey@invalid.address>
wrote:

<snip>

>> >There is nothing to be upgraded.
>>
>> Are you saying it comes with an automatic bug fixer? - Whau!
>No......

So are you going to fix them yourself?

<snip>

>> I'm not interested in what features it claims to provide. I'm
>> interested in whether these features are actually implemented in a
>> meaningful way and whether they work as advertised.
>They work for me... In fact they have worked quite nicely
>for me for about 6 or 8 years.

Yes. And the cases where it didn't work well, you don't know about.
That's the problem.

>> >In my setup, I use 29 Advanced Rules which BLOCK EVERYTHING
>> >I DO NOT USE.
>>
>> You'd wish. Setup is one thing. Verifying whether this setup actually
>> works as expected is another. You seem to have missed that second
>> part. You're blinded by marketing hype.
>No I don't wish. I can verify what Sygate is doing by taking
>a look at the excellent Traffic Log.

For app's that behave nicely, SyGate's traffic log is indeed useful.
Problem is, don't expect spyware or any other kind of malware to
behave nicely.

>From your listed understanding of Sygate, you shouldn't
>try to use it ---well guess you don't. You probably
>couldn't get it set up if you tried.
>Casey

Oh.. I have put it to the test along with a bunch of other so called
"personal firewalls". It takes only a few minutes to write code to
bypass SyGate's alleged "outbound protection".

How you can trust an outdated and no longer supported "security"
program designed by programmers who have proven to not understand
basic concepts of windows security is beyond me.

EOD.