XP Firewall vs. ZoneAlarm

[Speez]

Ok.. I know that ZoneAlarm might have a bit more features... but how good is
the XP Firewall compared to Zonealarm?

Thanks all!

 

[Richard Urban]

No comparison. ZoneAlarm Professional wins hands down. ZoneAlarm Free is a
bit hobbled in that all the extras have been stripped away, but it still
works fine.

The Windows firewall is better than nothing at all.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

No comparison. ZoneAlarm Professional wins hands down. ZoneAlarm Free
is a bit hobbled in that all the extras have been stripped away, but
it still works fine.

It's important to recognize, though, that the "extras" in ZA Professional
are exactly that--extras. They are not really firewall features at all, but
things like anti-virus, anti-spyware, anti-spam, etc. As far as the firewall
itself is concerned,, I believe the free ZA is the same as ZA Professional.
It's really not hobbled at all.

 

[Richard Urban]

Your opinion is recognized.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Your opinion is recognized.

Richard, if you think that it's just an opinion and that, with respect to
the firewall itself, you know that there are differences between the two,
I'd appreciate being set straight. Please tell us what the differences are.

 

[Richard Urban]

To me, ZoneAlarm Professional "is" the firewall. ZoneAlarm "free" is a
subset of it (Professional), used to entice people to buy the full product.

I give ZoneAlarm Free on every computer I setup or repair.

On computers for family members I purchase and install ZoneAlarm
Professional or ZoneAlarm Security Suite. BTW, only ZoneAlarm Security Suite
has the antivirus - not Professional. See
http://www.zonelabs.com/store/conte...ily/trial_zaFamily.jsp?lid=home_freedownloads

It just MY way of thinking.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Plato]

Ok.. I know that ZoneAlarm might have a bit more features... but how good is
the XP Firewall compared to Zonealarm?

ZA monitors both incoming and outgoing traffic. XP Firewall only
addresses incoming traffic. ZA comes in handy to stop phone home apps
and trojans from sending data. So, even if you dont install trojans and
viruses, ZA is a big help.

 

[Ron Sommer]

The free version has Basic Firewall.
Pro has Triple Defense Firewall™.

 

[Jonny]

Tell you straight up, I don't know. Never seen a comparative study between
XP Windows firewall and ZA's free firewall for inbound traffic attempts.
ZA does monitor outgoing traffic, XP Windows firewall does not.

May be wrong here, but my feeling is comparing firewalls is like comparing
antivirus software, depends on the threat, setup option selections or
deselections, and how the user uses his/her PC. The version of same is just
as important.

 

[Bruce Chambers]

Ok.. I know that ZoneAlarm might have a bit more features... but how good is
the XP Firewall compared to Zonealarm?

Thanks all!

Saying ZoneAlarm "might have a bit more features" [sic] than WinXP's
built-n firewall is rather like saying that a Lexus "might have a bit
more features" [sic] than a horse-drawn carriage.

WinXP's built-in firewall is adequate at stopping incoming attacks,
and hiding your ports from probes. What WinXP SP2's firewall does not
do, is provide an important additional layer of protection by informing
you about any Trojans or spyware that you (or someone else using your
computer) might download and install inadvertently. It doesn't monitor
out-going network 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 Windows
Firewall 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, in that they do provide that extra layer of
protection, are much more easily configured, and have free versions
readily available for downloading. Even the commercially available
Symantec's Norton Personal Firewall provides superior protection,
although it does take a heavier toll of system performance then do
ZoneAlarm or Sygate.


--

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

 

[Leo M. Cavanaugh III]

The free version has Basic Firewall.
Pro has Triple Defense Firewall™.

Hmm, so does my toothpaste.

 

[Ron Sommer]

Hmm, so does my toothpaste.

Did you notice that Forte Agent lost the tm symbol for trademark?

 

[Lars-Erik Østerud]

Speez:

Ok.. I know that ZoneAlarm might have a bit more features... but how good is
the XP Firewall compared to Zonealarm?

Incoming, same. Outgoing, none (it can't monitor programs trying to
send data out I think, or was it server programs, one of them

 

[Lars-Erik Østerud]

Bruce Chambers:

WinXP's built-in firewall is adequate at stopping incoming attacks,
and hiding your ports from probes. What WinXP SP2's firewall does not
do, is provide an important additional layer of protection by informing

So if you have a router with a firewall, then the XP Firewall is a
waste of CPU and memory (the router will do exacly the same stuff)

 

[Bruce Chambers]

So if you have a router with a firewall, then the XP Firewall is a
waste of CPU and memory (the router will do exacly the same stuff)

You're correct about the built-in firewall's being a waste of system
resources, in such a situation. However, most consumer-grade routers
don't really have a firewall; instead they use network address
translation (NAT) to hide the computers' IP addresses from the Internet.
The affect is the same, however: Incoming probes get no further than
the router.

Like WinXP's built-in firewall, NAT-capable routers do nothing to
protect the user from him/herself (or any "curious," over-confident
teenagers in the home). Again -- and I cannot emphasize this enough --
almost all spyware and many Trojans and worms are downloaded and
installed deliberately (albeit unknowingly) by the user. If you use a
router with NAT, it's still a very good idea to use a 3rd party software
firewall. So a software firewall, such as Sygate or ZoneAlarm, that can
detect and warn the user of unauthorized out-going traffic is an
important element of protecting one's privacy and security. (Remember:
Most antivirus applications do not even scan for or protect you from
adware/spyware, because, after all, you've installed them yourself, so
you must want them there, right?)


--

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