Which is best, using Vista or a third party such as Comodo or ZoneAlarm?
if you are ready to have third party firewall. As to what's the best...it depends how the software will work with you and your system. It's good to have firewall software that let you control (in and out) what makes a connection and will prevent intrusions and unsolicited requests.
You should try the freeware so you don't get to waste your money if you are not satisfied with the paid editions.
Note: If you will install Comodo or ZoneAlarm, you don't have to allow installation of the toolbar. It's not needed to run Comodo or Zone Alarm firewall.
For firewall software that have clean installer, you can try these (freeware too) :
1. Outpost Firewall
2. Online Armor Personal Firewall
I've never used a third party firewall, as long as you have a quality Anti-virus and anti-spyware and windows defender you will be safe a good majority of the time.. however a third party firewall is only going to be beneficial so if you feel you need one I'd say try out zonealarm and use that.
I have been using Zone Alarm for years, but recently ran into a problem using Zone Alarm with Firefox. Not sure why that is happening, but was having a lot of instances with Firefox crashing and need to reset the computer, and read of people changing over to Comodo to eliminate the problem. Doesn't seem reasonable on the face of it, but after replacing Zone Alarm with Comodo, have not had a problem with Firefox crashing or refusing to load pages after it got to over 250 meg of ram usage. Still not sure what caused the problem, but if you are using Zone Alarm and having problems with your browser, switch over to Comodo, and then fully remove Zone Alarm, and if you have a registry cleaner, run it after Zone Alarm Removed to eliminate any traces of ZA.
I don't see a reason not to just use the firewall that comes with Windows Vista. It blocks all incoming ports if you tell it to. That's all you need a firewall to do.
In fact, you might not even need a firewall running on your computer. If you use an ADSL/cable router that already has a NAT firewall, then your whole network is protected and you don't need a personal firewall.
Additionally, if you don't run any programs that listen to incoming connections (like server software), then you don't need any sort of firewall; but I tend to say "run some sort of firewall just in case one of your programs DOES listen to incoming ports without your knowledge".
Windows XP users should always have some sort of firewall enabled, as Windows XP itself listens to incoming ports.
If you are happy with your current security setup (firewall, antivirus and antispyware) there isn't any particular reason to change. Do make sure your firewall is scanning inbound AND outbound traffic (on the off-chance you pick up a virus or trojan which is spanning or stealing your data!). "Happy" would be no security violations.
Personally, I use Kaspersky Security Suite (2009 at the moment but about to upgrade to 2010). Very strong and flexible firewall, anti-virus signatures updated every hour (really!) good anti-spyware, relatively light load on my system and IMHO good value for money. The only minor downside is that the weekly anti-virus full scan can take several hours in the background but you can schedule this overnight.
If you are evaluating Windows 7 RC alongside your Vista system, Kaspersky doesn't yet work with 7.
But your mileage may vary.
| Forum legend: | |
| Locked thread | |
| Moderator | |
![]() |
CNET staff |
![]() |
Samsung staff |
| Norton Authorized Support team | |
| AVG staff | |
| Windows Outreach team | |
![]() |
Dell staff |
| Intel staff | |