Kerio Konfusion

[Bob Adkins]

To my surprise, my install of Kerio Personal firewall expired.

I un installed it, re downloaded from the author, and re installed it. OK,
it looked different...simpler...but works OK.

A while ago, I was perusing my old files, and found a NEWER version of Kerio
Personal install file. There's a 2.2.5, and a 3.3 beta.

Kerio's site has a 4.x beta, but this is apparently a beta of the Shareware
version.

Ehhhhh?

Do we have to use the old 2.x to get a true Freeware version?

Bob

 

[YoKenny]

To my surprise, my install of Kerio Personal firewall expired.

I un installed it, re downloaded from the author, and re installed
it. OK, it looked different...simpler...but works OK.

A while ago, I was perusing my old files, and found a NEWER version
of Kerio Personal install file. There's a 2.2.5, and a 3.3 beta.

Kerio's site has a 4.x beta, but this is apparently a beta of the
Shareware version.

Ehhhhh?

Do we have to use the old 2.x to get a true Freeware version?

There is a new Kerio forum and the old Yahoo Groups forum where this has
been discussed extensivly.
http://forums.kerio.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/keriofirewall/

 

[dkg_ctc]

To my surprise, my install of Kerio Personal firewall expired.

I un installed it, re downloaded from the author, and re installed
it. OK, it looked different...simpler...but works OK.

A while ago, I was perusing my old files, and found a NEWER
version of Kerio Personal install file. There's a 2.2.5, and a 3.3
beta.

Kerio's site has a 4.x beta, but this is apparently a beta of the
Shareware version.

Ehhhhh?

Do we have to use the old 2.x to get a true Freeware version?

Kerio 2.x will never expire, it's features will stay the same, and is
freeware for non-business use.

Kerio 4.x will expire after thirty days, but even after expiration
will still have the basic application control features and port
filtering features. It will NOT have:

1.) Web filtering (I prefer Proxomitron for that task anyways).
2.) Intrusion detection system (I found the IDS in KPF4 flaky and
disabled it anyways).
3.) Won't run on server OSes (NT4 Server, Windows 2000 Server,
Windows 2003 Server).
4.) Will no longer run on an internet connecion sharing gateway
computer.

Is KPF4 crippleware? Is it liteware? That's for the user to
decide...for me it's useless because my primary system is an ICS
gateway.

 

[donutbandit]

Do we have to use the old 2.x to get a true Freeware version?

This is one case where the "upgrade" probably is not. Kerio 2.1.5 is as
close as you will get to a perfect firewall.

 

[Seattle Norm]

--
Where can one download kerio firewall 2.1.5? I just skeedaddled over to
old.version.com and did not find it in their archives. would much
appreciate a link.

TIA

 

[dkg_ctc]

Where can one download kerio firewall 2.1.5? I just skeedaddled
over to old.version.com and did not find it in their archives.
would much appreciate a link.

http://download.kerio.com/dwn/kpf/kerio-pf-2.1.5-en-win.exe

 

[Shuttlecock]

To my surprise, my install of Kerio Personal firewall expired.

Found this in the .chm file
--- quote ---
The same installation package is used for both version. After installation
the product behaves as a 30-days trial version (full version limited by
time). If the product is not registered by the expiration date, it becomes
freeware. The product becomes a full version after license purchase and
product registration (for detailed information refer to chapter
"Registration").

 

[Duddits]

Where can one download kerio firewall 2.1.5? I just skeedaddled over to
old.version.com and did not find it in their archives. would much
appreciate a link.

alt.binaries.freeware

regards

Dud
--

The biggest cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid people are
so sure about things and the intelligent folks are so full of doubts.

-- Bertrand Russell

 

[Richard Steven Hack]

Kerio 4.x will expire after thirty days, but even after expiration
will still have the basic application control features and port
filtering features. It will NOT have:

1.) Web filtering (I prefer Proxomitron for that task anyways).
2.) Intrusion detection system (I found the IDS in KPF4 flaky and
disabled it anyways).
3.) Won't run on server OSes (NT4 Server, Windows 2000 Server,
Windows 2003 Server).
4.) Will no longer run on an internet connecion sharing gateway
computer.

Is KPF4 crippleware? Is it liteware? That's for the user to
decide...for me it's useless because my primary system is an ICS
gateway.

I'd say it's not crippleware or liteware since the new version
continues to do everything the old version did (except for the
apparent lack of an ability to turn off load on boot).

And you CAN continue to use the IDS facilities in the freeware
version. The statement about the freeware capabilities is as follows
from the help file:
==================================================
Freeware versions are limited by the following restrictions:

It is available for personal and/or noncommercial use only.

Web content filtering, including its logs and statistics, is not
available (see chapter Chapter ).

It cannot be used at Internet Gateways (refer to chapter Preferences)

Logs cannot be sent to Syslog server (details in chapter Log Options).

Configuration cannot be protected by a password and it is not possible
to access and administer the firewall remotely.

It cannot be used on server type operating systems, such as Windows NT
Server, Windows 2000 Server and Windows Server 2003. If the trial
version was installed on any of these systems, the Personal Firewall
Engine service will be disabled by the expiration date and it will not
be able to restore it.

=============================================================

 

[dkg_ctc]

I'd say it's not crippleware or liteware since the new version
continues to do everything the old version did (except for the
apparent lack of an ability to turn off load on boot).

The freeware version *doesn't* do everything the old version does. It
doesn't run on server-class OSes, nor does it run on ICS gateways.
And even if it *DID* have the same features of the previous version,
that doesn't mean it's not liteware/crippleware. See the definitions
at http://pricelessware.org/2003/info2003PL.htm#Wares . Specifically,
"A useful program that is more limited in features and functionality
than the commercial product. Liteware is not time-limited" for
liteware, and "free version of a commercial program. More limited in
features and functionality than the commercial product. Crippleware
has severe limitations. Functionality that is important to the average
user has been disabled" for crippleware. So yes, I think it's clear
that it's one or the other of crippleware or liteware.

And you CAN continue to use the IDS facilities in the freeware
version.

Thanks for the correction. Couldn't recall exactly, but thought that
was one of the limitations.

 

[Aaron]

@news.snowcrest.net:

So where is there any advantage for the home user over Kerio 2.1.5?

Application control. Any time any application starts or said application
starts another application , kerio will warn you unless you have set up a
rule allowing it.

More trouble than it is worth if you are not that security conscious.





Aaron (my email is not munged!)

 

[donutbandit]

I'd say it's not crippleware or liteware since the new version
continues to do everything the old version did (except for the
apparent lack of an ability to turn off load on boot).

And you CAN continue to use the IDS facilities in the freeware
version. The statement about the freeware capabilities is as follows
from the help file:
==================================================
Freeware versions are limited by the following restrictions:

It is available for personal and/or noncommercial use only.

Web content filtering, including its logs and statistics, is not
available (see chapter Chapter ).

It cannot be used at Internet Gateways (refer to chapter Preferences)

Logs cannot be sent to Syslog server (details in chapter Log Options).

Configuration cannot be protected by a password and it is not possible
to access and administer the firewall remotely.

So where is there any advantage for the home user over Kerio 2.1.5?

 

[Aaron]

v2.1.5 has application control in the context of applications seeking
to access the internet. Can't see what a firewall is doing controlling
applications that /don't/ access the internet.

Think leak tests/ trojans that start IE or any other trusted apps.
App controls are one way to fight it.

But I actually agree, once the malware is inside your system it's game
over. But still, a lot of people are concerned about leak tests, and
firewall companies love to boost how good they are against leak tests.
See Pcflank test et al.






Aaron (my email is not munged!)

 

[LateforWork]

@news.snowcrest.net:



Application control. Any time any application starts or said application
starts another application , kerio will warn you unless you have set up a
rule allowing it.

More trouble than it is worth if you are not that security conscious.

v2.1.5 has application control in the context of applications seeking to
access the internet. Can't see what a firewall is doing controlling
applications that /don't/ access the internet.

 

[LateforWork]

Think leak tests/ trojans that start IE or any other trusted apps.
App controls are one way to fight it.

But I actually agree, once the malware is inside your system it's game
over. But still, a lot of people are concerned about leak tests, and
firewall companies love to boost how good they are against leak tests.
See Pcflank test et al.

v2.1.5 does tell you if any existing application which you've given
internet access gets changed. Ok, it's not the same thing...

On a somehwat different tack, I suppose one thing that ought to be asked
is whether the later version corrects any inherent flaws in the firewall
engine itself. Does v2.1.5 have any inherent flaws that are corrected
with the latest version? IMO I'm not really interested in installing
'bloat' unless there's some flaw in the v2.1.5. Even then I'd probably
live with v2.1.5 unless it's proven to have a serious flaw.

Maybe if anyone from Kerio is reading this thread they might consider
reviving the v2.1.5 approach for those users (I guess I'm not alone)
which want a lean and mean firewall.

LateforWork

 

[donutbandit]

Maybe if anyone from Kerio is reading this thread they might consider
reviving the v2.1.5 approach for those users (I guess I'm not alone)
which want a lean and mean firewall.

I believe that 2.1.5 is finished. There really isn't anything they can do
to improve it without adding more features. Which is fine with me, because
it does exactly what I want it to do.

I was involved in beta testing Kerio PF 2, and the stated intent by Kerio
at that time was to develop a firewall with sandboxing, something like the
new Tiny PF. It seems as if they deviated from that course and instead,
tried to come out with the next Zone Alarm. I haven't tried the new Kerio
firewall. I do know, from reading, that they have had major problems with
it from day one.

 

[LateforWork]

I believe that 2.1.5 is finished. There really isn't anything they can do
to improve it without adding more features. Which is fine with me, because
it does exactly what I want it to do.

I was involved in beta testing Kerio PF 2, and the stated intent by Kerio
at that time was to develop a firewall with sandboxing, something like the
new Tiny PF. It seems as if they deviated from that course and instead,
tried to come out with the next Zone Alarm. I haven't tried the new Kerio
firewall. I do know, from reading, that they have had major problems with
it from day one.

Thanks, that's interesting. I agree. v2.1.5 does everything that a
firewall should.

 

[Richard Steven Hack]

So where is there any advantage for the home user over Kerio 2.1.5?

Actually I'm not sure there IS a MAJOR advantage. If the firewall is
working correctly and your rules are correct, you don't notice it's
there unless it pops up an alert.

So I'd say upgrading is a matter of personal choice. I suspect Kerio
added the app-launch blocking thing and the IDS facilities as a
marketing ploy, since probably everyone who wanted a good firewall
already either owned Kerio 2.x or something else.

 

[Richard Steven Hack]

The freeware version *doesn't* do everything the old version does. It
doesn't run on server-class OSes, nor does it run on ICS gateways.

I wasn't aware the original did since I didn't need that capability.
If true, this is a reduction in functionality but it probably occurs
because the server-class OS's are getting more complicated to write
for and support, so I'm not surprised they don't want the freeware
product running on them - even if they don't support the freeware
version anyway.

And even if it *DID* have the same features of the previous version,
that doesn't mean it's not liteware/crippleware. See the definitions
at http://pricelessware.org/2003/info2003PL.htm#Wares . Specifically,
"A useful program that is more limited in features and functionality
than the commercial product. Liteware is not time-limited" for
liteware, and "free version of a commercial program. More limited in
features and functionality than the commercial product. Crippleware
has severe limitations. Functionality that is important to the average
user has been disabled" for crippleware. So yes, I think it's clear
that it's one or the other of crippleware or liteware.

I'd say it definitely is not crippled for the average user. As a
firewall it appears to do everything the predecessor did (except for
running on server OS's and gateways - the average user is not running
it on those.)

In some sense, most freeware is liteware in that rarely does a
freeware product outperform a commercial product of the same genre.
There are exceptions, of course, perhaps many of them, but it is still
rare that a specific freeware product has greater functionality than
an equivalent commercial product. Before everyone cites a dozen
examples, reread what I said - I KNOW there are exceptions. And in
fact, it probably is hard to find a "true" commercial product (as
opposed to shareware) that does some of the things some freeware
products do, as well, since the relevant market niche is too small for
commercial developers. But in a head-to-head comparison of major
software genre commercial products versus the freeware equivalents, I
suspect freeware would come off as "liteware". The important
difference in my mind is cost - wherther it is liteware or not, am I
paying money for it? And does it do what I want it to do? If it does
and it's free, it's freeware to me, whether it is liteware or not.