Some bits of info...
Doing software installations often suggest that you shut the
anti-virus off and the firewall, and spyware detection apps,
too.

Yes DSL and cable are both broadband, always ON connections.
There are nasty bot programs and Trojans on the Internet
just looking for an unprotected computer.

Even though a $25-50 router is not as good a hardware
firewall as is possible, it is enough to project the
connection. I run the free version of Zone Alarm and also
have a router. The router also allows you to connect more
than one computer to your DSL/cable and fully share the
connection and surf, email and download on both at the same
time.



"Leythos" <void RemoveThis @nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:5dU_g.17087$OE1.10790@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
| In article <#FDWgOj9GHA.788@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>,
| pappion RemoveThis @nospamyahoodot.com says...
| > Please explain why one needs a router with broadband
Internet access...does
| > than include DSL?? What, and why, how, and when?
|
| First, don't be confused by what some vendors call a
firewall when it's
| really just a fancy NAT Router. NAT Routing is the minimum
that you want
| to protect your network, and it's very effective at
blocking unsolicited
| inbound connections, but it does nothing about outbound
and most can't
| do anything about content checking and even fewer know the
difference
| between HTTP and port 80 traffic.
|
| If you have ANY internet connection, even for a single PC,
that provides
| a network/USB connection, then you need a NAT Router (at
the minimum),
| to protect your PC.
|
| If you have Dial-Up, they don't make Dial-Up NAT routers
any more, at
| least not that I can find, but you need some form of
personal firewall
| software, even for Dial-Up.
|
| I like the DFL-700 from D-Link, but it's not cheap, but
it's as close to
| a real firewall as you can get without spending $450, it
runs about $265
| depending on your country/location.
|
| At the very least, a BEFRS41 from Linksys or other cheap
(under $80) NAT
| router, often called a firewall by idiot marketing
departments, will do
| for your non-business, non-secure, solution.
|
| This is just the first step, you also need to follow basic
security
| methods, like not using IE, not running as an
Administrator level
| account, not opening attachments in emails, not opening
files on
| websites, not opening attachments when they appear to be
from someone
| you know (as they might be sent from a virus on your
friends
| machine)....
|
|
|
| --
|
| spam999free RemoveThis @rrohio.com
| remove 999 in order to email me

This message is not archived

You might also look at the Comodo Firewall which is also free:
http://www.personalfirewall.comodo.com/ .
--
GeneK
"Pop'" <nodoby RemoveThis @devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:OmDF4Ak9GHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
Pappion wrote:
> Sheesh, I'm bowled over. This is much what our State Blind Services
> technologist told me last week. Now, I'm agog!
>
> Where to start? Have updated V. of AVG and AdAware (which just found a
> 'file,' thank goodness), and Spyblaster's latest V. with my XP Pro
> Sp2, and all other Updates. I have "cookies" only on notification and
> approval, and do not run Flash. Big deal!

AVG is a pretty decent antivirus and quite competent. It's not a firewall
though.
All the spyware apps you listed are decent and wise to use all of them
periodically.

>
> So, which firewall do you recommend?

ZoneAlarm is good, and free. So is Kerio. Sygate used to be free but
they've dropped the freebie, though they aren't expensive. I like ZA the
best of all of them for its user friendliness. Personal opinions; ymmv.


I'd just come to the point where
> I wasn't running every thing daily to protect my computer--on the
> advice of our technologist. But, I'm still proceeding with the
> back-up and cleaning the HD as noted in a prior post. In fact, he's
> going to do it for me.

You need to ALWAYS have a firewall and anti-virus going. Always. Period.
Never connect to the internet without them. You do not however have to
run
scans every day, but it's a good idea to do so if you can. I run my scans
every couple of weeks unless something is acting funny, but my firewall
and
av are ALWAYS active and watching for malware from the internet or
wherever.

It sounds as if you may have misunderstood your "technologist". Perhaps
some clarifications might be in order.

Pop

>
>
> "Bruce Chambers" <bchambers RemoveThis @cable0ne.n3t> wrote in message
> news:%23Cw5i4g9GHA.4572@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> RAY0711 wrote:
>>> Hi , could u please advise me wether i can use anther fire wall
>>> along with the windows firwall that comes with the windows xp
>>> service pack2 home edition , or can only one 1 fire wall be used
>>> to good effect , thanx ray
>>
>>
>> The Windows Firewall included with SP2, while vastly superior to
>> the original ICF in terms of visibility, usability and
>> configurability, is still rather lacking, as a solid security
>> component. It still can't supplant 3rd-party solutions, nor is it
>> intended to do so; rather, it's intended to complement them. And,
>> like the original ICF, it will not monitor out-going traffic.
>>
>> WinXP's built-in firewall is usually adequate at stopping incoming
>> attacks, and hiding your ports from probes. What WinXP SP2's
>> firewall 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 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, 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. Having said that, it's important to remember that
>> firewalls and
>> anti-virus applications, which should always be used and should
>> always be running, while important components of "safe hex," cannot,
>> and should not be expected to, protect the computer user from
>> him/herself. Ultimately, it is incumbent upon each and every
>> computer user to learn how to secure his/her own computer.
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Bruce Chambers
>>
>> Help us help you:
>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>>
>> They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
>> safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin
>>
>> Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand
>> Russell

You might also look at the Comodo Firewall which is also free:
http://www.personalfirewall.comodo.com/ .
--
GeneK
"Pop'" <nodoby.RemoveThis@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:OmDF4Ak9GHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
Pappion wrote:
> Sheesh, I'm bowled over. This is much what our State Blind Services
> technologist told me last week. Now, I'm agog!
>
> Where to start? Have updated V. of AVG and AdAware (which just found a
> 'file,' thank goodness), and Spyblaster's latest V. with my XP Pro
> Sp2, and all other Updates. I have "cookies" only on notification and
> approval, and do not run Flash. Big deal!

AVG is a pretty decent antivirus and quite competent. It's not a firewall
though.
All the spyware apps you listed are decent and wise to use all of them
periodically.

>
> So, which firewall do you recommend?

ZoneAlarm is good, and free. So is Kerio. Sygate used to be free but
they've dropped the freebie, though they aren't expensive. I like ZA the
best of all of them for its user friendliness. Personal opinions; ymmv.


I'd just come to the point where
> I wasn't running every thing daily to protect my computer--on the
> advice of our technologist. But, I'm still proceeding with the
> back-up and cleaning the HD as noted in a prior post. In fact, he's
> going to do it for me.

You need to ALWAYS have a firewall and anti-virus going. Always. Period.
Never connect to the internet without them. You do not however have to
run
scans every day, but it's a good idea to do so if you can. I run my scans
every couple of weeks unless something is acting funny, but my firewall
and
av are ALWAYS active and watching for malware from the internet or
wherever.

It sounds as if you may have misunderstood your "technologist". Perhaps
some clarifications might be in order.

Pop

>
>
> "Bruce Chambers" <bchambers.RemoveThis@cable0ne.n3t> wrote in message
> news:%23Cw5i4g9GHA.4572@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> RAY0711 wrote:
>>> Hi , could u please advise me wether i can use anther fire wall
>>> along with the windows firwall that comes with the windows xp
>>> service pack2 home edition , or can only one 1 fire wall be used
>>> to good effect , thanx ray
>>
>>
>> The Windows Firewall included with SP2, while vastly superior to
>> the original ICF in terms of visibility, usability and
>> configurability, is still rather lacking, as a solid security
>> component. It still can't supplant 3rd-party solutions, nor is it
>> intended to do so; rather, it's intended to complement them. And,
>> like the original ICF, it will not monitor out-going traffic.
>>
>> WinXP's built-in firewall is usually adequate at stopping incoming
>> attacks, and hiding your ports from probes. What WinXP SP2's
>> firewall 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 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, 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. Having said that, it's important to remember that
>> firewalls and
>> anti-virus applications, which should always be used and should
>> always be running, while important components of "safe hex," cannot,
>> and should not be expected to, protect the computer user from
>> him/herself. Ultimately, it is incumbent upon each and every
>> computer user to learn how to secure his/her own computer.
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Bruce Chambers
>>
>> Help us help you:
>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>>
>> They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
>> safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin
>>
>> Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand
>> Russell

Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
> Pop' wrote:
>
>> miss-information wrote:
>
>>> While you do not answer the OPs question you imply Windows Firewall
>>> can be used in tandem with 3rd party offerings. Is this correct?
>>
>> No. It is always advised to NOT run more than one firewall. Most
>> decent fw programs in fact will disable the windows firewall for you.
>> Some others will but don't bother to ell you that. And others yet
>> won't bother with it. Multiple firewalls can "argue" with each
>> other, and if/when you DO decide to let a specific site thorugh,
>> you'll have to allow it in ALL firewalls that are active, not just
>> one. And then you have the instances where the firewalls will
>> compete with each other which can really slow things down.
>
>
> I agree with everything you say, except for the very first word. Yes,
> they *can* be used together.

Agreed; my bad.

Pop'

>
>
>> It IS
>> possible to do; it is NOT advisable to do.
>
>
> Exactly!

Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
> Pop' wrote:
>
>> miss-information wrote:
>
>>> While you do not answer the OPs question you imply Windows Firewall
>>> can be used in tandem with 3rd party offerings. Is this correct?
>>
>> No. It is always advised to NOT run more than one firewall. Most
>> decent fw programs in fact will disable the windows firewall for you.
>> Some others will but don't bother to ell you that. And others yet
>> won't bother with it. Multiple firewalls can "argue" with each
>> other, and if/when you DO decide to let a specific site thorugh,
>> you'll have to allow it in ALL firewalls that are active, not just
>> one. And then you have the instances where the firewalls will
>> compete with each other which can really slow things down.
>
>
> I agree with everything you say, except for the very first word. Yes,
> they *can* be used together.

Agreed; my bad.

Pop'

>
>
>> It IS
>> possible to do; it is NOT advisable to do.
>
>
> Exactly!

RAY0711 wrote:

> Hi , could u please advise me wether i can use anther fire wall along with
> the windows firwall that comes with the windows xp service pack2 home
> edition , or can only one 1 fire wall be used to good effect , thanx

Just use Windows Firewall. Playing around with anything else is just snake
oil.

http://preview.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html

RAY0711 wrote:

> Hi , could u please advise me wether i can use anther fire wall along with
> the windows firwall that comes with the windows xp service pack2 home
> edition , or can only one 1 fire wall be used to good effect , thanx

Just use Windows Firewall. Playing around with anything else is just snake
oil.

http://preview.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html

P. Johnson wrote:

> RAY0711 wrote:
>
>
>>Hi , could u please advise me wether i can use anther fire wall along with
>>the windows firwall that comes with the windows xp service pack2 home
>>edition , or can only one 1 fire wall be used to good effect , thanx
>
>
> Just use Windows Firewall. Playing around with anything else is just snake
> oil.
>
> http://preview.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html

BULLSHIT!

John

P. Johnson wrote:

> RAY0711 wrote:
>
>
>>Hi , could u please advise me wether i can use anther fire wall along with
>>the windows firwall that comes with the windows xp service pack2 home
>>edition , or can only one 1 fire wall be used to good effect , thanx
>
>
> Just use Windows Firewall. Playing around with anything else is just snake
> oil.
>
> http://preview.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html

BULLSHIT!

John

Upon what do you base the information to only use Windows Firewall? Its only
does 1/2 the job.

"P. Johnson" <baloo.TakeThisOut@ursine.ca> wrote in message
news:42h114-bb.ln1@ursine.ca...
> RAY0711 wrote:
>
>> Hi , could u please advise me wether i can use anther fire wall along
>> with
>> the windows firwall that comes with the windows xp service pack2 home
>> edition , or can only one 1 fire wall be used to good effect , thanx
>
> Just use Windows Firewall. Playing around with anything else is just
> snake
> oil.
>
> http://preview.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html
>

DITTO.

"John John" <audetweld.RemoveThis@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
news:OWZObd39GHA.896@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> P. Johnson wrote:
>
>> RAY0711 wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hi , could u please advise me wether i can use anther fire wall along
>>>with
>>>the windows firwall that comes with the windows xp service pack2 home
>>>edition , or can only one 1 fire wall be used to good effect , thanx
>>
>>
>> Just use Windows Firewall. Playing around with anything else is just
>> snake
>> oil.
>>
>> http://preview.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html
>
> BULLSHIT!
>
> John
>

DITTO.

"John John" <audetweld.RemoveThis@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
news:OWZObd39GHA.896@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> P. Johnson wrote:
>
>> RAY0711 wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hi , could u please advise me wether i can use anther fire wall along
>>>with
>>>the windows firwall that comes with the windows xp service pack2 home
>>>edition , or can only one 1 fire wall be used to good effect , thanx
>>
>>
>> Just use Windows Firewall. Playing around with anything else is just
>> snake
>> oil.
>>
>> http://preview.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html
>
> BULLSHIT!
>
> John
>

Upon what do you base the information to only use Windows Firewall? Its only
does 1/2 the job.

"P. Johnson" <baloo.RemoveThis@ursine.ca> wrote in message
news:42h114-bb.ln1@ursine.ca...
> RAY0711 wrote:
>
>> Hi , could u please advise me wether i can use anther fire wall along
>> with
>> the windows firwall that comes with the windows xp service pack2 home
>> edition , or can only one 1 fire wall be used to good effect , thanx
>
> Just use Windows Firewall. Playing around with anything else is just
> snake
> oil.
>
> http://preview.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html
>

"Pappion" <pappion DeleteThis @nospamyahoodot.com> wrote in message
news:OQsLJV59GHA.3860@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Upon what do you base the information to only use Windows Firewall? Its
> only does 1/2 the job.
>
> "P. Johnson" <baloo DeleteThis @ursine.ca> wrote in message
> news:42h114-bb.ln1@ursine.ca...
>> RAY0711 wrote:
>>
>>> Hi , could u please advise me wether i can use anther fire wall along
>>> with
>>> the windows firwall that comes with the windows xp service pack2 home
>>> edition , or can only one 1 fire wall be used to good effect , thanx
>>
>> Just use Windows Firewall. Playing around with anything else is just
>> snake
>> oil.
>>
>> http://preview.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html
>>
>
>

If you don't get infected why do you need outgoing protection?

--
Frank Saunders, MS-MVP OE/WM
http://www.fjsmjs.com
Answer in newsgroup. Don't send mail.