mali.ivica87 sri 12.3.2008 11:05

Zone Alarm Free...zadovoljan sam....a šta se tiće sučelja,nikad ga ni ne gledam....osim onog oblačića koji mi iskoči kad trebam dopustiti neki program


Oko za oko, četkica za zube.
Alen sri 12.3.2008 11:25

prije sam korsitio zone alarm firewall free, ali sam ga izbrisao, pa sam onda neki vrijeme koristio windows firewall, ali i njega sam iskljucio jednostavno nemam zivaca cackati sa firewallom... iskljucen mi je i nemam nikakvih problema....


Sve što možeš sad ostavi za kasnije
DrNasty sri 12.3.2008 12:12

Ja koristim Kaspersky. Zna nekad biti naporan ali je dobar.


C2Duo 6400@3 GHz , 4 GB Transcend Jetram 667 MHz@750 MHz, 4-4-4-12, Radeon X1950pro@615/700, Asus P5K-E/Wifi-ap
Bugofil čet 13.3.2008 21:34
DrNasty kaže...

Ja koristim Kaspersky. Zna nekad biti naporan ali je dobar.


 Kaspersky Anti Hacker je super. Koristim ga i ja i nije naporan, baš je supač !

Najbolja hrana je Afrička; jedeš malo, a imaš veliki stomak !
scorpion667 pet 14.3.2008 00:01

Comodo Firewall Pro sa Defense +. Ispocetka je malo naporan (kao i svaki firewall) ali kada ga se malo podesi onda se moze uzivati.


CORE 2 DUO E4300 @ 1.8GHZ
2 GB RAM 667MHZ
ASUS 7300 GT @ 475/920
Kizmar pet 28.3.2008 13:16

Najbolji je definitivno (po mom misljenju) Kerio odnosno Sunbelt Personal Firewall (kupljen pa promjenio ime). Neznam da li je tocno ali cuo sam da ga i americka mornarica koristi. Sad ako je dovoljan njima siguno je i nama. Kad ga se upari sa Nod32-om dobije se ubitacna zastita.

crystal6 sri 2.4.2008 20:11

Zone Alarm. Meni sasvim OK program, a i super je što mogu dozvoliti ili zabraniti pristup nekom programu za nešto. Već me dvaput spasio od virusa jer nisam dozvolio pristup. :)

Kizmar sri 2.4.2008 20:17

To što si ti opisao dolazi kao opcija u vecini vatrozida samo je problem sto je vrlo iritantna u nekom vremenskom intervalu nako instaliravanja vatrozida. Ujedno je to i razlog sto je vecina korisnika ne upotrebljava.


Lupam glavom u radio
sodom sri 2.4.2008 20:25

Isprobano dobri su Outpost, ZoneAlarm, a mozes i Eset smart security uzet u obzir no nije ni blizu mocan ko ova dva. Outpost je dosta iritantan sa svima zastitama ukljucenim jer te skoro pa trazi dozvolu za svaki klik misa. No kad pogasis sve nobovske zastite firewall je ok. Na srecu kvaliteta firewalla se ne gleda ljepotom sucelja i svatko tko na taj nacin bira firewall neka si kupi sminku na popustu u kozmu. Cinjenica je da zonealarm pro ne radi na visti, a uz outpost ima prilicno kvalitetno odradeno dodjeljivanje dozvola za programe, otvaranje portova i slicno sto je kod bilo kakvih akcija s mrezama glavna prednost jer nikad neznas koga krivit.

Kizmar sri 2.4.2008 20:51

Kerio je komercijalan varozid, a u besplatnoj inacici ima onemogucene neke alate koji su ionako nebitni za racunalnu sigurnost (tipa bloker reklama i slicno).

Prije je bio besplatan u svim inacicam a posto ga je kupio Sunbelt promjenio je ime i sada se zove "Sunbelt Personal Firewall".Ocito je da imas neprovjeren informacije.

 

Zatim ova stranica koju si ti naveo testira samo jedan mali dio cjelokupne zastite pojedinog vatrozida te su uvjeti testiranja umjetni. Rezultati testa koji si ti naveo ne daju cjelokupnu sliku sigurnosti pojedinog vatrozida, a leak test ujedno i nije najbolji nacin da se do nje dode.

 

Lupam glavom u radio
Kizmar sri 2.4.2008 20:55

Ovo navodim kao reakcija Sunbelta testu koji si ti naveo:

 

Sunbelt Software is committed to providing the strongest possible security products to its customers, and we will be working to correct demonstrable issues in the Sunbelt Personal Firewall. Users can expect these and other continuing enhancements for the Sunbelt Personal Firewall in the near future.

However, we have some reservations about personal firewall "leak testing" in general. While we appreciate and support the unique value of independent security testing, we are admittedly skeptical as to just how meaningful these leak tests really are, especially as they reflect real-world environments.

The key assumption of "leak testing" -- namely, that it is somehow useful to measure the outbound protection provided by personal firewalls in cases where malware has already executed on the test box -- strikes us as a questionable basis on which to build a security assessment. Today's malware is so malicious and cleverly designed that it is often safest to regard PCs as so thoroughly compromised that nothing on the box can be trusted once the malware executes. In short, "leak testing" starts after the game is already lost, as the malware has already gotten past the inbound firewall protection.

Moreover, "leak testing" is predicated on the further assumption that personal firewalls should warn users about outbound connections even when the involved code components are not demonstrably malicious or suspicious (as is the case with the simulator programs used for "leak testing"). In fact, this kind of program design risks pop-up fatigue in users, effectively lowering the overall security of the system -- the reason developers are increasingly shunning this design for security applications.

Finally, leak testing typically relies on simulator programs, the use of which is widely discredited among respected anti-malware researchers -- and for good reason. Simulators simply cannot approximate the actual behavior of real malware in real world conditions. Furthermore, when simulators are used for anti-malware testing, the testing process is almost unavoidably tailored to fit the limitations of simulator instead of the complexity of real world conditions. What gets lost is a sense for how the tested products actually perform against live, kicking malware that exhibits behavior too complex to be captured in narrowly designed simulators.


Lupam glavom u radio