ZA beta firewall for Vista

[Robert Moir]

I have used MS's ISA product, and have complained loudly about using the
MS's Small Business Server product with ISA running on the SBS server,
when ISA should be on a dedicated perimeter device!

But, it is not practical to expect end users to run a dedicated proxy
server or to be knowledgeable of their details. Therefore, we have "toy"
f/ws that IMO do provide value, even though they are less than ideal.

Well I'd certainly agree that _any_ kind of firewall is better than none.

Re: absolutely cannot *guarantee* any kind of proper outbound filtering no
matter what you do

You expectations are higher than mine. IMO, all software is suspect to
some degree eventually, that is why one should have multiple backups.

Well yes but I consider the issue of outbound filtering in particular to be
a thorny one, and in my opinion worries about other aspects of outbound
filtering are akin to fidding while Rome burns. I do accept that others may
not agree with me on that point, even though my original reply was very
strong I'm happy to respect other people's opinions and leave them to get on
with it...

 

[Peter Foldes]

I would stay away from ZA and Norton and many others as a firewall client. Stay with the one that comes with Windows. You will be much better off

 

[CZ]

I would stay away from ZA and Norton and many others as a firewall

Peter:

The Vista f/w is not practical for outbound control, and I have used ZA free
in XP for years w/o problems.

I have installed the ZA f/w beta in my main Vista install so I can test it
in normal daily use.
IMO, it is impressive. Note that I run it with Vista's f/w enabled.

If you choose to run the beta on your normal computer setup, acknowledge the
risk, and have one or more backups. BTW, I am behind a NAT-router so port
exposure is not an issue, and so far I have not seen any signs of program
instability.