CA vs. Symantec vs. Microsoft

[Guest]

LOL! If that's meant as a dig, I wasn't trying to hide what
products I use. I've posted them here before. I didn't mention
their names because it wasn't relevant to my point.

I use NAV (despite all the bad things you hear about it, I've
been using it for years successfully, and have never seen any
reason to change), the free version of ZoneAlarm, and the
following anti-spyware products:

I used NAV pretty much exclusively on Windows products (going all the way to
Windows 95 and even 3.1 if I remember correctly) until late 2003, when I
switched to Trend Micro and, still later, CA (my current product). NAV is
still Symantec's best product, hands down.

Spyware Blaster
AdAware
Spybot Search and Destroy
Spyware Guard
Microsoft Anti-Spyware
IE-Spyad
Winpatrol
SWShredder

I think I have used most of these products at least once. I still use Ad
Aware, and I used Spybot until the Microsoft beta became available. I
stopped using Spyware Blaster and IE-Spyad when I started using the beta
version of SP2. Nevertheless, I still use these two programs on my computer
dumbass brother's computer. I think I used SWShredder once or twice. I
don't recognize the other two products.

The good news seems to be that Ad Aware SE continues to be steady and
reliable, and the antispyware software is slowly improving from what it used
to be as recently as 6-8 months ago.

 

[Plato]

Spyware Blaster
AdAware
Spybot Search and Destroy
Spyware Guard
Microsoft Anti-Spyware
IE-Spyad
Winpatrol
SWShredder

My guess is that you can eat off the floors in your home they are so
clean.

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

OK, but what if, despite all of your precautions, a nasty manages to
sneak by your protective procedures--something new and totally
unexpected or planned for by any of your various AV and antispyware
scanners?

It *does* happen. And if you are sans firewall protection for outgoing
communications, you won't even *know* it's happening.

 

[Ken Blake]

In

My guess is that you can eat off the floors in your home they
are so
clean.

LOL! But whatever the merits of eating off the floors, the merits
of having a clean computer are clear.

It takes very little time to run these. I may not need to run
them all, but it doesn't hurt, and I feel more comfortable
knowing that the risk of problems is very slight.

 

[Ken Blake]

In

OK, but what if, despite all of your precautions, a nasty
manages to
sneak by your protective procedures--something new and totally
unexpected or planned for by any of your various AV and
antispyware
scanners?

It *does* happen. And if you are sans firewall protection for
outgoing
communications, you won't even *know* it's happening.

My sentiments exactly. There's no cost to running a better
firewall (many are free) and since there is no guarantee that
"protective procedures" are ever perfect, the prudent thing to do
is to run a bi-directional firewall.

 

[Fred S]

:




I prefer to use means other than my firewall to keep the crud from every
getting on my machine in the first place.




They stop crud already on your machine from phoning home. I prefer to keep
the crud off my machine in the first place so that it never even gets the
opportunity to phone home. For someone like me, who knows how to avoid
crudware and also has other software already running as first and second
lines of defenses and early warning systems, using a third party firewall is
-- please excuse the crude analogy --like wearing a condom when you don't
even plan to have sex.

Ken

Ken,

I understand what you are saying but you are obviously smart enough to
be using good software to protect your PC except for the firewall. Why
you would run the Windows firewall and not one (for free) like ZA is the
question and very shortsighted to say the least.

There are "worms" that can get on your PC - many can bypass antivirus
software and arrive embedded in email, from downloads, or even from
visiting www sites that "appear" to be safe. If that happens, you are
in trouble when they go "out" FROM your PC, and you won't even know it
unless you have ZA or Sygate or whatever.

Virus signatures are developed as quickly as possible but don't forget,
many of them are out there BEFORE the antivirus signature files are
developed and made available to you and your antivirus software.

I'm sure you are careful but you are one small step away from being as
well protected as possible. Too bad you don't see it that way. If you
wait long enough, Microsoft will fix the Windows firewall to do what ZA,
Sygate, and EZ Armor already do now.

I hope you make it that long.

Fred

 

[Plato]

My sentiments exactly. There's no cost to running a better
firewall (many are free) and since there is no guarantee that
"protective procedures" are ever perfect, the prudent thing to do
is to run a bi-directional firewall.

Got teens in the house? I put in a Linksys Router w/built in firewall
only to find that the teen upstairs took about 10 minutes to learn how
to disable ports to allow access to what he believed, was ONLY his pc.

 

[Dan]

I agree with Gary. He knows his stuff. A firewall is even suggested to be
used on dial-up now that corporations have tightened security hackers are
getting desperate and will go after any unsecured machine.

: OK, but what if, despite all of your precautions, a nasty manages to
: sneak by your protective procedures--something new and totally
: unexpected or planned for by any of your various AV and antispyware
: scanners?
:
: It *does* happen. And if you are sans firewall protection for outgoing
: communications, you won't even *know* it's happening.
:
: --
: Gary S. Terhune
: MS MVP Shell/User
: http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
: http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm
:
: : > "Fred S" <"Fred S" wrote:
: >
: > > You should drop the Windows firewall and use Zone Alarm or even CA's
: EZ
: > > Armor which is an older version of ZA.
: >
: > > Windows firewall is better than nothing but only blocks INcoming
: > > traffic. Many viruses and rogue programs get on your PC and try to
: go
: > > OUT and the Windows firewall will not even look at them.
: >
: > I prefer to use means other than my firewall to keep the crud from
: every
: > getting on my machine in the first place.
: >
: > > ZA is Free, so is Sygate, which is also very good - each of these is
: > > better than the Windows firewall.
: >
: > They stop crud already on your machine from phoning home. I prefer to
: keep
: > the crud off my machine in the first place so that it never even gets
: the
: > opportunity to phone home. For someone like me, who knows how to
: avoid
: > crudware and also has other software already running as first and
: second
: > lines of defenses and early warning systems, using a third party
: firewall is
: > -- please excuse the crude analogy --like wearing a condom when you
: don't
: > even plan to have sex.
: >
: > Ken
:

 

[Bruce Chambers]

Overall, a scathing indictment of an operating system, isn't it?.

Microsoft could offer me the Windows source code,
free, with permission to market it as I see fit
and I would turn the offer down on principle.

I can only hope that Microsoft will see the light,
stop wasting valuable resources patching quicksand,
junk their current obsolete WinTel architecture
and develop products worthy of the 21st century
in which the rest of us lives.

Before the people already working on such products
beat them to it, although they may already be too late.

Watching Microsoft at work is like watching an elephant die.
It is slow. It is stubborn. It is painful. It is inevitably fatal.

And we're all waiting with bated breath for the better OS that you seem
to think you're capable of developing.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH

 

[Dan]

Will Microsoft ever release a bi-directional firewall to compete with
ZoneAlarm, Sygate and Computer Associates firewalls?

: In : Gary S. Terhune <[email protected]> typed:
:
: > OK, but what if, despite all of your precautions, a nasty
: > manages to
: > sneak by your protective procedures--something new and totally
: > unexpected or planned for by any of your various AV and
: > antispyware
: > scanners?
: >
: > It *does* happen. And if you are sans firewall protection for
: > outgoing
: > communications, you won't even *know* it's happening.
:
:
: My sentiments exactly. There's no cost to running a better
: firewall (many are free) and since there is no guarantee that
: "protective procedures" are ever perfect, the prudent thing to do
: is to run a bi-directional firewall.
:
: --
: Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
: Please reply to the newsgroup
:
:
: > message
: > : >> "Fred S" <"Fred S" wrote:
: >>
: >>> You should drop the Windows firewall and use Zone Alarm or
: >>> even
: >>> CA's EZ Armor which is an older version of ZA.
: >>
: >>> Windows firewall is better than nothing but only blocks
: >>> INcoming
: >>> traffic. Many viruses and rogue programs get on your PC and
: >>> try to
: >>> go OUT and the Windows firewall will not even look at them.
: >>
: >> I prefer to use means other than my firewall to keep the crud
: >> from
: >> every getting on my machine in the first place.
: >>
: >>> ZA is Free, so is Sygate, which is also very good - each of
: >>> these is
: >>> better than the Windows firewall.
: >>
: >> They stop crud already on your machine from phoning home. I
: >> prefer
: >> to keep the crud off my machine in the first place so that it
: >> never
: >> even gets the opportunity to phone home. For someone like me,
: >> who
: >> knows how to avoid crudware and also has other software
: >> already
: >> running as first and second lines of defenses and early
: >> warning
: >> systems, using a third party firewall is -- please excuse the
: >> crude
: >> analogy --like wearing a condom when you don't even plan to
: >> have sex.
: >>
: >> Ken
:
:

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

So put a password on the router setup, <bg>.

 

[Dan]

What was the router number, Plato? My router is a wired 4-port router model
number --- BEFSX41. Can this Router be hacked? I also have ZoneAlarm Pro.
as my software firewall. Has your teenager managed to get past both
firewalls and if so your teen will soon be in for a surprise if he tries to
attack my machine because I soon plan to have a third firewall that will hack
the person attempting to hack me. I have to research this and see if it can
be sold for corporations such as Target Corp. or if I have to acquire it
through my government connections. Have a nice night!

: Ken Blake wrote:
: >
: > My sentiments exactly. There's no cost to running a better
: > firewall (many are free) and since there is no guarantee that
: > "protective procedures" are ever perfect, the prudent thing to do
: > is to run a bi-directional firewall.
:
: Got teens in the house? I put in a Linksys Router w/built in firewall
: only to find that the teen upstairs took about 10 minutes to learn how
: to disable ports to allow access to what he believed, was ONLY his pc.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
: --
: http://www.bootdisk.com/
:
:

 

[Dan]

People have informed me that they have managed to hack the free ZA but as of
yet have not been able to hack the Zone Alarm PRO. version. I do not know
how reliable the source is so I cannot say if it can be done for sure.

:
:
: Ken Gardner wrote:
: > "Fred S" <"Fred S" wrote:
: >
: >
: >>You should drop the Windows firewall and use Zone Alarm or even CA's EZ
: >>Armor which is an older version of ZA.
: >
: >
: >
: >>Windows firewall is better than nothing but only blocks INcoming
: >>traffic. Many viruses and rogue programs get on your PC and try to go
: >>OUT and the Windows firewall will not even look at them.
: >
: >
: > I prefer to use means other than my firewall to keep the crud from every
: > getting on my machine in the first place.
: >
: >
: >>ZA is Free, so is Sygate, which is also very good - each of these is
: >>better than the Windows firewall.
: >
: >
: > They stop crud already on your machine from phoning home. I prefer to
keep
: > the crud off my machine in the first place so that it never even gets the
: > opportunity to phone home. For someone like me, who knows how to avoid
: > crudware and also has other software already running as first and second
: > lines of defenses and early warning systems, using a third party firewall
is
: > -- please excuse the crude analogy --like wearing a condom when you don't
: > even plan to have sex.
: >
: > Ken
:
: Ken,
:
: I understand what you are saying but you are obviously smart enough to
: be using good software to protect your PC except for the firewall. Why
: you would run the Windows firewall and not one (for free) like ZA is the
: question and very shortsighted to say the least.
:
: There are "worms" that can get on your PC - many can bypass antivirus
: software and arrive embedded in email, from downloads, or even from
: visiting www sites that "appear" to be safe. If that happens, you are
: in trouble when they go "out" FROM your PC, and you won't even know it
: unless you have ZA or Sygate or whatever.
:
: Virus signatures are developed as quickly as possible but don't forget,
: many of them are out there BEFORE the antivirus signature files are
: developed and made available to you and your antivirus software.
:
: I'm sure you are careful but you are one small step away from being as
: well protected as possible. Too bad you don't see it that way. If you
: wait long enough, Microsoft will fix the Windows firewall to do what ZA,
: Sygate, and EZ Armor already do now.
:
: I hope you make it that long.
:
: Fred

 

[Dan]

IE-Spyad caused a problem on my system a while back so I do not use it.
After the false positive for a baddie in CWShredder I do not use it --- the
version that was bad was from Intermute and AntiVir claimed it was bad but it
turned out to be a false positive. I like and use SpySweeper by Webroot.
Just today startpage and CWShredder somehow got onto my system but SpySweeper
cleaned them up without a fuss -- 3 registry entries with about 5 associated
traces --- not too big a deal

: In : Ken Gardner <[email protected]> typed:
:
: > "Ken Blake" wrote:
: >
: >>> I'm not so sure. In my experience, when you use separate
: >>> vendors for separate interrelated software functions
: >>> (antivirus,
: >>> spyware, and firewall), you are asking for trouble.
: >
: >> I don't think that these functions are really interrelated,
: >> and
: >> that hasn't been my experience at all. I use one company's
: >> products for anti-virus, a second for a firewall, and six
: >> others
: >> for anti-spyware without any problems at all. That's on both
: >> of
: >> my machines here, as well as on the machines of numbers of
: >> others
: >> to whom I've recommended the same combinations.
: >
: > Actually, I'm having second thoughts about my original comment,
: > even
: > though it is still accurate as applied to me. Most of the
: > people who
: > are having recent trouble are people who install "security
: > suites"
: > such as Norton Internet Security.
:
:
: OK, glad to hear it.
:
:
: > And in the interest of full
: > disclosure, I now use Microsoft and Lavasoft for antispyware,
: > EZ
: > Trust for antivirus, and the Windows firewall.
:
:
: LOL! If that's meant as a dig, I wasn't trying to hide what
: products I use. I've posted them here before. I didn't mention
: their names because it wasn't relevant to my point.
:
: I use NAV (despite all the bad things you hear about it, I've
: been using it for years successfully, and have never seen any
: reason to change), the free version of ZoneAlarm, and the
: following anti-spyware products:
:
: Spyware Blaster
: AdAware
: Spybot Search and Destroy
: Spyware Guard
: Microsoft Anti-Spyware
: IE-Spyad
: Winpatrol
: SWShredder
:
: --
: Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
: Please reply to the newsgroup
:
:

 

[Dan]

I wonder if Hugh will join Microsoft to help develop a better operating
system since he knows a lot of information.

: Hugh Candlin wrote:
:
: >
: >
: > Overall, a scathing indictment of an operating system, isn't it?.
: >
: > Microsoft could offer me the Windows source code,
: > free, with permission to market it as I see fit
: > and I would turn the offer down on principle.
: >
: > I can only hope that Microsoft will see the light,
: > stop wasting valuable resources patching quicksand,
: > junk their current obsolete WinTel architecture
: > and develop products worthy of the 21st century
: > in which the rest of us lives.
: >
: > Before the people already working on such products
: > beat them to it, although they may already be too late.
: >
: > Watching Microsoft at work is like watching an elephant die.
: > It is slow. It is stubborn. It is painful. It is inevitably fatal.
: >
: >
:
:
: And we're all waiting with bated breath for the better OS that you seem
: to think you're capable of developing.
:
:
: --
:
: Bruce Chambers
:
: Help us help you:
:
:
:
: You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
: both at once. - RAH

 

[Plato]

So put a password on the router setup, <bg>.

Yeah I know that's an available feature. I sort of like to learn tho
what kids his age do as it helps when going out in the field on service
calls.

 

[Plato]

What was the router number, Plato? My router is a wired 4-port router model
number --- BEFSX41. Can this Router be hacked? I also have ZoneAlarm Pro.

I dont recall. Hacked is not what Im talking about. It was just
interesting how he found the http address of the router to get to the
setup in only a matter of minutes reasearching using google. The kids's
not a computer geek either

 

[Leythos]

I dont recall. Hacked is not what Im talking about. It was just
interesting how he found the http address of the router to get to the
setup in only a matter of minutes reasearching using google. The kids's
not a computer geek either

The router manual tells you to change the password as soon as you start
configuring it. There are only two ways a unauthorized person can access
the configuration pages - 1) You didn't setup a strong password. 2)
Pressing the reset button on the back for 30 seconds and it resets to
default values - including the password.

 

[Hugh Candlin]

And we're all waiting with bated breath for the better OS that you seem
to think you're capable of developing.

Given the resources available to Microsoft,
and using the new hardware architecture
developed by IBM and others as a baseline,
I am indeed capable of project managing
the development of a better OS and browser.

Let there be NO doubt in your mind about that.

Many, many other developers worldwide think likewise,
which is why there is so much resentment toward MS.
It is something that they bring down on their own head,
through their proven inability to innovate, and their
refusal to think outside the box and step outside
the safety net of their current moribund architecture.

Bill Gates himself has forecast the death of Microsoft
if they allowed the company to become complacent
and rest on its laurels, which is exactly what they
appear to be doing.

I have challenged a major IT vendor in the past,
worked with their software engineers
and proved to them that their OS was flawed,
and personally made significant changes to the design
which resulted in outstanding improvements.

I speak with the benefit of experience, with the confidence
that I can practice what I preach. Your response,
on the other hand, is devoid of any meritorious content.

I anticipate that a revolutionary OS announcement
will be made in the not too distant future.

It will not be from Microsoft, unless they are running
one of the best cloak-and-dagger development
operations ever mounted.

 

[Ken Blake]

In

Got teens in the house?

Nope. My only son, now 43, got me started on PCs nearly 20 years
ago. There was a time when I could say that he taught me
everything I knew about PCs. He's now a professional developer.

I put in a Linksys Router w/built in firewall
only to find that the teen upstairs took about 10 minutes to
learn how
to disable ports to allow access to what he believed, was ONLY
his pc.

I would imagine that security needs under those circumstances are
very different from mine.