Greetings --
WinXP's built-in firewall is _adequate_ at stopping incoming
attacks, and hiding your ports from probes. It doesn't give you any
alarms, or any other kind of indication, to tell you that it is
working, though. Nor is it very easily configurable. What WinXP also
does not do, is protect you from any Trojans or spyware that you (or
someone else using your computer) might download and install
inadvertently. It doesn't monitor out-going traffic at all, other
than to check for IP-spoofing, much less block (or at even ask you
about) the bad or the questionable out-going signals. It assumes that
any application you have on your hard drive is there because you want
it there, and therefore has your "permission" to access the Internet.
Further, because the ICF is a "stateful" firewall, it will also assume
that any incoming traffic that's a direct response to a Trojan's or
spyware's out-going signal is also authorized.
ZoneAlarm, Kerio, or Sygate are all much better than WinXP's
built-in firewall, and are much more easily configured, and there are
free versions of each readily available. Even the commercially
available Symantec's Norton Personal Firewall is superior by far,
although it does take a heavier toll of system performance then do
ZoneAlarm or Sygate.
WinXP's built-in ICF is _not_ designed to act as a compliment to
3rd party firewalls, and Microsoft actually recommends disabling it if
you use another software firewall, although a great many people have
reported no problems using ICF in conjunction with other products. My
position is that running two or more software firewalls simultaneously
is generally unnecessary and can _sometimes_ cause conflicts, possibly
negating the protection of both. In any event, having two firewalls
running simultaneously is most certainly an unnecessary drain on
system resources.
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
