[PL] PL2006: Kerio Personal Firewall version?

[Susan Bugher]

venerdì 7 ottobre 2005 Susan Bugher ha scritto:

I agree with you that it's better to choose it before the PL vote, ISTM it
would help to avoid confusion.

Hi Maria,

I've liated Kerio on the nominations page. The description is for v
2.1.5 as that as the preferred version so far. If that changes I'll
revise the description.

http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/P_programs.php#0409-PW

Kerio Personal Firewall
(Liteware) (free for personal use) NOTE: (earlier version)
Windows OS: Windows 98/ME/NT/2000/XP
Languages: English
Description: Kerio Personal Firewall (KPF) is a software agent that
builds a barrier between your personal computer and the Internet. KPF is
designed to protect your PC against attacks from both the Internet, and
other computers in the local network. KPF controls all data flow in both
directions from the Internet to your computer and vice versa, and it can
block all attempted communication allowing only what you choose to
permit. This makes KPF an ideal solution for notebook computers that
freely travel in and out of the corporate network, facing exposure to
various risks as they connect from different locations. Kerio Personal
Firewall protects against information theft, modification or
destruction, Trojan horse applications, spyware, unauthorized access
from within the local network, denial of service attacks to applications
or services.
Company: Author: --
Home page:
http://www.kerio.com/kpf_home.html
download: v 2.1.5 (2003-05-09) [ kerio-pf-2.1.5-en-win.exe (2 MB)]
http://download.kerio.com/dwn/kpf/kerio-pf-2.1.5-en-win.exe
alternate download v 2.1.5 (2003-05-09) [ kerio-pf-2.1.5-en-win.exe (2 MB)]
http://download.kerio.cz/dwn/kpf/kerio-pf-2.1.5-en-win.exe

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)

 

[=?iso-8859-1?Q?Omar=A9?=]

Hello Maria,

Repeating what I said in another post today: Should the vote be counted
separately for each version or do we combine the vote? Should we make it
an either/or choice or let people vote for both versions? ISTM it's
better and fairer to choose a *preferred* version for Kerio now and vote
on that version - IMO that will give us a more meaningful result.

If we can't reach a consensus on the preferred version through
discussion then I suggest a preliminary vote to decide which version is
preferred. IMO that ballot should be in the week before the start of
Pricelessware voting to ensure mazimum participation.

To date only 5 people have clearly stated a preference:

---------

in favor of listing v 4.2.1

MLC <[email protected]>
---------

in favor of listing v 2.1.5

bambam <[email protected]>
Steve H <[email protected]>
(e-mail address removed)
REM <[email protected]>
---------

Please let me know what your decision is on this.

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)

Susan you can add me in favor of 2.1.5
Omar

 

[Aaron]

Going by the logic that they are 2 different entries...

Should the vote be counted separately for each version or do we
combine the vote?

Seperately. They are different products. Many people who like Kerio 2
hate Kerio 4. Many people who like kerio 4 would not vote for kerio 2.

Should we make it an either/or choice or let people
vote for both versions?

Using the logic that they are different programs, we should allow votes
for both programs. After all if I can vote for 2 products even if they
are in the same category (say sygate and zone alarm), so why can't I vote
for Kerio 4 and Kerio 2 if that is what I want? I doubt though anyone
will vote for both kerio 4 and 2.

From your questions, I can see which way you are obviously leaning
towards, but IMHO if you treat them as different apps, you can easily
resolve any questions.

ISTM it's better and fairer to choose a
*preferred* version for Kerio now and vote on that one version - IMO
that will give us a more meaningful result.

I can't see why results will become fairer and more meaningful by denying
Kerio 4 or 2 a chance.

I think it's fair and more meaningful to actually have 2 seperate votes.
Kerio 4 and 2 appeals to completely different groups of users. They are
as different as night and day, not based on the same source etc.

Remember this are two products that periodically generate mini arguments
between the 2 camps. Kerio 2.15 definitely holds the majority view but
I've noticed fairly strong and growing vocal minority support for kerio 4
lately.

Some one who votes for one won't necessary vote for the other. They are
*that* different , while I suspect in the examples you give below for say
Gravity versus super gravity, most users will vote for either anyway.

Clarifying which version of essentially the same program to nominate is
one thing, but Kerio 4 and 2 are completely different products so
clarifying which version to nominate is not necessary.

Last year we had 3 *pairs* of programs on the ballot.

I appreciate that my recomendation, leads to more work for you.

http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/ftp/Archives/2005PL/PL2005ProgramBallo
t.txt

<q>
Gravity (#0328-PW) [AND] Super Gravity (#0728-PW)

This one should have really being merged.

OE-Quotefix (#0509-PW) [AND] Outlook-Quotefix (#0528-PW)

Completely different so okay.

TightVNC (#0772-PW) [AND] VNC (#0807-PW)

I see this one is tricky and I don't know enough to comment on this.

In any case, Kerio 4 and 2 have much better claims to be listed as
completely different apps then 1st and the 3rd one in your example, so
they should definitely be seperate.

</q>

Note: in earlier years the votes for those pairs were combined to
determine if both programs would be selected - the votes had to be
individually checked to see if one person voted for both programs in a
pair (to avoid double counting).

Simple, if someone doesn't state definitely which version he is voting
for, the votes don't count, it's a spoiled vote. Is this really a very
big problem with people not stating the exact version?

Those three pairs of apps are a right royal PITA - they complicate the
vote counting considerably and the votes *don't* tell us if there is a
clear preference for one app or the other. The decision to combine
those vote counts was made some years ago - perhaps it's time for
another discussion.

I do agree that some of the apps deserve to be combined. But Kerio 4 and
2 aren't the ones.

 

[Demetris]

Should the vote be counted separately for each version or do we combine
the vote? Should we make it an either/or choice or let people vote for
both versions? ISTM it's better and fairer to choose a *preferred*
version for Kerio now and vote on that one version - IMO that will give
us a more meaningful result.

Since it is reasonable to suppose that Kerio 4 could get enough votes to
be PL on its own, I don't see how voting for a preselected version would
be fairer or more meaningful.

They are different programs, and they are both good programs.

I think both shoud be listed on the ballot:

+ Kerio 2 (or Kerio 2.1.5, or Kerio 2x)
+ Kerio 4 (or Kerio 4.2.1, or Kerio 4x)

Also, if anyone wants to vote for both, they should be allowed to do so,
in the same way that, as Aaron wrote, one can vote for both Sygate and
Zone Alarm.

Greetings,
Demetris

 

[elaich]

Since it is reasonable to suppose that Kerio 4 could get enough votes to
be PL on its own, I don't see how voting for a preselected version would
be fairer or more meaningful.

As I said before, Kerio is dropping the firewall. What is it about that
that you people don't understand? Why are you still discussimg the pros and
cons of adding Kerio 4 when the parent company has announced it's demise?

 

[MLC]

venerdì 7 ottobre 2005 Alastair Smeaton ha scritto:

Which later?
We're speaking about the latest, 4.2.1, released 6 days ago.
Did you try it? I don't think a firewall running three processes for a
total of 28 MB is bloated, and I can't see any problematic issue.

OTOH after 2.1.5 they've addressed and fixed resource leaks, low-risk
security bugs, and they've added boot time protection (IMO very important).

Then I don't understand why we should vote PL a firewall version lacking
these fixes, when is available a free more secure version.

I'm for 4.2.1.

[/QUOTE]

Apologies - I tried the 4.x series twice, fairly soon after it was
released, and it was larger in download size, memory use, and it
crashed several times. It may well be much better now.

Still, I found Kerio 2.15 the best, after trying sygate and many
others - always went back to Kerio - especially as this chap "sponge"
had great rules which could be imported - seem to remember I could not
do this with the later version -this too may have changed

No need to apologize, Alastair

When all of you read me, keep in mind please that English is only my second
language and I'm not able to express myself with the due tone and the more
appropriate words.
Smilies can help, but sometimes I forget them too!

 

[Helen]

As I said before, Kerio is dropping the firewall. What is it about that
that you people don't understand? Why are you still discussimg the pros and
cons of adding Kerio 4 when the parent company has announced it's demise?

Maybe it's because their "dropping the firewall" doesn't mean the program is
not good; and because that doesn't mean we will stop using it as long as it is
useable (and does the job, of course). Furthermore, this concerns the 2006
nominations for the programs people like and/or use as opposed to the programs'
"status" of 'soon to be gone' or changing company name, etc. I like and used
Kerio 2.1.5 and will continue to use it for as long as it serves the purpose.
Just my $.02 worth.

Helen

 

[Susan Bugher]

[email protected]:

As I said before, Kerio is dropping the firewall. What is it about that
that you people don't understand? Why are you still discussimg the pros and
cons of adding Kerio 4 when the parent company has announced it's demise?

Evidently you missed the discussion about this in the program
description thread.

ATM it's still available. Both versions *may* be unavailable in 2006
although that's far from certain (the earlier version was "dropped" some
years ago). Kerio will be listed for nomination. If it is selected as
Pricelessware and becomes unavailable it will be removed from PL2006
(the same procedure we use if an app becomes $ware and no last freeware
version is available).

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)

 

[Susan Bugher]

Going by the logic that they are 2 different entries...


Seperately. They are different products. Many people who like Kerio 2
hate Kerio 4. Many people who like kerio 4 would not vote for kerio 2.


Using the logic that they are different programs, we should allow votes
for both programs. After all if I can vote for 2 products even if they
are in the same category (say sygate and zone alarm), so why can't I vote
for Kerio 4 and Kerio 2 if that is what I want? I doubt though anyone
will vote for both kerio 4 and 2.

I can't see why results will become fairer and more meaningful by denying
Kerio 4 or 2 a chance.

ISTM there are two ways of looking at this. Is it better to split the
vote between two versions of an app (in which case neither one may be
selected) or choose the version that is favored by the majority and list
the app once on the ballot?

I think it's fair and more meaningful to actually have 2 seperate votes.
Kerio 4 and 2 appeals to completely different groups of users. They are
as different as night and day, not based on the same source etc.

ISTM the suggestion would have to apply to any app that's proposed for
nomination. Two different versions have been discussed for dBpowerAMP
Music Converter (dMC). Other version "splits" might be suggested if we
adopt the proposal.

Remember this are two products that periodically generate mini arguments
between the 2 camps. Kerio 2.15 definitely holds the majority view but
I've noticed fairly strong and growing vocal minority support for kerio 4
lately.

There's no rule that prohibits listing two versions - the decision is up
to the group.

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)

 

[REM]

ISTM there are two ways of looking at this. Is it better to split the
vote between two versions of an app (in which case neither one may be
selected) or choose the version that is favored by the majority and list
the app once on the ballot?

ISTM the suggestion would have to apply to any app that's proposed for
nomination. Two different versions have been discussed for dBpowerAMP
Music Converter (dMC). Other version "splits" might be suggested if we
adopt the proposal.

There's no rule that prohibits listing two versions - the decision is up
to the group.

I tend to think that certain categories, archivers for example, should
have more than one program listed. There are many, each is priceless
in my view, and there will be a pretty large split vote on whatever
programs get nominated. If voting is heavy in such a category, but
split, it seems that listing all the clear cut winners would be a good
idea.

Firewalls are less in number than archivers, but again, I see nothing
wrong in listing both Kerio versions and even another if voting is
heavy and the votes are split. I don't have any real experience in the
newer versions of ZA, Sygate, etc., or even Kerio, so I can only vote
on v2.1.5. I trust in other ACFers that the new version is also good.

I have noting against listing multiple versions or multiple programs
if warranted by the votes cast.

 

[Mike Bourke]

When all of you read me, keep in mind please that English is only my second
language and I'm not able to express myself with the due tone and the more
appropriate words.
Smilies can help, but sometimes I forget them too!

Hey, Maria, the same thing happens from time to time even when one English
speaker is trying to communicate with another! The fact is that people
usually read all sorts of tonal inflexions and subtexts into just about
every piece of plain text they read. This is a subconscious thing, it
usually helps people make sense of what they have read - but sometimes it
can result in the most unexpected problems when someone misinterprets what
you meant to say. Your English may suffer under the extra burdon of being a
second language, but that usually means that you have to think a bit more
about what you actually want to say and how you are going to say it - those
for whom English is a first language can just open a page and start typing
with only a vague idea of how to convey their message.

So don't worry about it - your English seems just fine to me. And if someone
misunderstands what you meant to say - or you misunderstand what someone was
trying to say - its not necessarily anyone's fault.

Mike

 

[Ron Lopshire]

venerdì 7 ottobre 2005 Alastair Smeaton ha scritto:




No need to apologize, Alastair

When all of you read me, keep in mind please that English is only my second
language and I'm not able to express myself with the due tone and the more
appropriate words.
Smilies can help, but sometimes I forget them too!

Maria,

Don't worry about it. Your English is already better than the NASCAR
announcers on Fox Television. ;-)

Ron

 

[Aaron]

I would submit that for the case of kerio, the votes should be split,
otherwise it would distort the results.

Say we choose Kerio 2 has the prefered version.

I sincerely hope and I strongly suspect the people who only use Kerio 4,
won't vote for Kerio 2! To do so would be to distort the results. How can
you vote for Kerio 2 as priceless if you only know and like Kerio 4?

This isn't the case of a smaller incremental change between versions!
Like Gravity versus supergravity in your example from last year.

For kerio 2 to get in pricelessware like this I submit is highly
misleading.

Even if the people using kerio 4 don't vote for kerio 2, and avoid
distorting the results for kerio 2, we will still not get at the "truth"
because if Kerio 4 was a seperate entry it might have gotten in too.

In practise, I'm certain that Kerio 2 will get enough votes, whether
Kerio 4 is including or not. It's just the principle of the matter. And
I'm curious about kerio 4 support.

And if including Kerio 4 to the nomination list means neither gets in
,because the votes are split, so what? The votes were never meant to be
aggregated after all.


Yes, but in your example, you gave fairly dubious cases. And that's what
I'm referring to.

Two different versions have been discussed for dBpowerAMP
I'm not all that familar with this case, but this one is a matter of a
last freeware version versus liteware. Are they all that different?

This is a much tricker case that I don't wish to get into because of
ignorance. We are basically getting into a philosophical debate about
categories.

I knoew Kerio 4 and 2 are way across the line.

I tend to think that certain categories, archivers for example, should
have more than one program listed. There are many, each is priceless
in my view, and there will be a pretty large split vote on whatever
programs get nominated. If voting is heavy in such a category, but
split, it seems that listing all the clear cut winners would be a good
idea.

This seems to concern a different question- What is pricelessware?
The Top winners? How many of them? And if even the 5th runner up gets say
100 votes, shouldnt it be listed?

Firewalls are less in number than archivers, but again, I see nothing
wrong in listing both Kerio versions and even another if voting is
heavy and the votes are split. I don't have any real experience in the
newer versions of ZA, Sygate, etc., or even Kerio, so I can only vote
on v2.1.5. I trust in other ACFers that the new version is also good.

I have noting against listing multiple versions or multiple programs
if warranted by the votes cast.

Neither do I.

 

[REM]

I sincerely hope and I strongly suspect the people who only use Kerio 4,
won't vote for Kerio 2! To do so would be to distort the results. How can
you vote for Kerio 2 as priceless if you only know and like Kerio 4?

This isn't the case of a smaller incremental change between versions!
Like Gravity versus supergravity in your example from last year.

For kerio 2 to get in pricelessware like this I submit is highly
misleading.

We could ask that participants vote on only one program in each
category. That is, vote on your favorite firewall and then on your
favorite archiver, etc.

This seems to concern a different question- What is pricelessware?
The Top winners? How many of them? And if even the 5th runner up gets say
100 votes, shouldnt it be listed?

The best of the best in Freeware as determined by the readers of
alt.comp.freeware...

That seems to imply single winners. If it is a popularity contest with
a single winner many great programs will not be mentioned. Sometimes a
lesser program will be nominated by mistake. See the thread about PGP
after a crippled version was grandfathered in.

The PL list is obviously for us all to refer to. It is also a very
valuable tool for the general public.

What best serves the audience?

Neither do I.

As to specifics, the devil is in the details

 

[Ric]

PL2005 shows version 2.1.5 of Kerio Personal Firewall (and notes it is
an earlier version). The posted description proposes to change the
description to show the current version (v 4.2.1)

28 people voted for Kerio during the PL2005 selection process. Please
speak up if you plan to vote for it this year. Which version do you
use/like/recommend/think should be listed on the PL2006 ballot?

Susan

I think Kerio 2.1.5 should be removed from pricelessware.

http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/2004/PL2004SECURITY.php
says "it can block all attempted communication allowing only what you
choose to permit." This is untrue, which is easily verified by the
following method.

Insert a new rule at the TOP of your ruleset:
Description: Frag Test
Protocol: ICMP
Direction: Outgoing
Set ICMP: [8] Echo Request
Remote Endpoint Address Type: Any address
Rule Valid: Always
Action: Deny
Select Display alert box when this rule matches.

Then do
ping www.bbc.co.uk
You should see an alert box saying

ICMP [8] Echo Request to (null) [212.58.224.113] was blocked by rule
'Frag Test'

Then do (that's a small L, not i or 1)
ping -l 2000 www.bbc.co.uk

The fragmented packets will go through the firewall and a reply should
be received. This is not restricted to ICMP, it applies to any
fragmented packet.

Remember to delete the Frag Test rule afterwards.

This makes Kerio 2.1.5 closer to useless than priceless.
If it is retained on the pricelessware list I feel these shortcomings
should at least be mentioned, along with a recommendation that it not
be used without a router.

ric

 

[Susan Bugher]

This makes Kerio 2.1.5 closer to useless than priceless.
If it is retained on the pricelessware list I feel these shortcomings
should at least be mentioned, along with a recommendation that it not
be used without a router.

Hold your fire. Program discussion starts on Oct. 15. Right now we are
just assembling a list of programs to be discussed.

http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/2006/2006PL-Nominations.php

October 15 - October 31, 2005 - Program nominations, seconds and program
discussion.

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)

 

[Susan Bugher]

In practise, I'm certain that Kerio 2 will get enough votes, whether
Kerio 4 is including or not. It's just the principle of the matter. And
I'm curious about kerio 4 support.

Then run your own poll or - just look at the results of this thread
to date.

in favor of listing v 4.2.1

MLC <[email protected]>

---------

in favor of listing v 2.1.5

bambam <[email protected]>
Steve H <[email protected]>
(e-mail address removed)
REM <[email protected]>
(e-mail address removed)
Bob <[email protected]>

----------

IMO one supporter for v 4.2.1 does not warrant a separate listing. Let's
resume this discussion when there are more grounds for having the debate.

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)

 

[Demetris]

Then run your own poll or - just look at the results of this thread
to date.

in favor of listing v 4.2.1

MLC

---------

in favor of listing v 2.1.5

bambam
Steve H
smeaton
REM
omar
Bob

----------

IMO one supporter for v 4.2.1 does not warrant a separate listing. Let's
resume this discussion when there are more grounds for having the debate.

Susan

Susan, your original question was:

"Which version do you use/like/recommend/think should be listed on the
PL2006 ballot?"

How do you know the posters were answering to the fourth part?

This is a multiple question and can be answered fully only by a multiple
answer. For example, my full answer to it is:

I use 2x
I like 2x
I usually recommend 4x (because of the known issue in 2x)
I think both should be listed on the ballot

Most importantly, since everyone seems to view Kerio 2 and Kerio 4 as
two different apps, then, if both are nominated, I think both
nominations should be accepted.

Greetings,
Demetris

 

[Susan Bugher]

"Which version do you use/like/recommend/think should be listed on the
PL2006 ballot?"

How do you know the posters were answering to the fourth part?

Read the thread. I counted only the *unambiguous* responses.

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)

 

[Dennis Roark]

PL2005 shows version 2.1.5 of Kerio Personal Firewall (and notes it is
an earlier version). The posted description proposes to change the
description to show the current version (v 4.2.1)

28 people voted for Kerio during the PL2005 selection process. Please
speak up if you plan to vote for it this year. Which version do you
use/like/recommend/think should be listed on the PL2006 ballot?

Susan

I think 2.1.5 is the best and should be PL listed. I believe that after
the big virus onslaught 2 or 3 years ago, Kerio decided to move some of
what was free in 2.1.5 into a paid version and make it only temporarily
available in the free version. I may be wrong, but they brought out glitzy
versions that had less functionality unless you get the paid one. That is
there option of course, but as long as they keep 2.1.5 available, even if
they won't give hand-holding tech support for it, that should be the
preferred version for freeware folks.

--
Dennis Roark

(e-mail address removed)
Starting Points:
http://sio.midco.net/denro/www