Windows 7 Firewall question

[brkkab123]

Next month I'm going to be getting a Dual Band Router mainly for the firewall. After I recieve it and have it set up, I'm going to uninstall Norton Internet Security 2011 as my subscription ends in the middle of November. I'm replacing Norton with MSE. Is Windows 7's firewall along with the router's hardware firewall good enough ? .

 

[Nibiru2012]

It's a decent enough firewall. Much better than the one that came with XP.

I would recommend using Comodo's free firewall as it helps with more protection than offered with the Windows 7 Firewall.

Go to the link below to download it.

http://personalfirewall.comodo.com/free-download.html

 

[brkkab123]

I'll stick with Windows 7 Firewall.

Thanks. I'll stick w/ Windows 7 firewall. I've used Comodo in the past and it was a nuiscance having to delete it's temporary files every day.

It's a decent enough firewall. Much better than the one that came with XP.

I would recommend using Comodo's free firewall as it helps with more protection than offered with the Windows 7 Firewall.

Go to the link below to download it.

http://personalfirewall.comodo.com/free-download.html

 

[Tushman]

Thanks. I'll stick w/ Windows 7 firewall. I've used Comodo in the past and it was a nuiscance having to delete it's temporary files every day.

I think that's a wise decision. I have not heard too many complimentary things about Comodo firewall.

 

[etalmar]

brkkab123, I'll second that. Comodo receives raves reviews from many people who swear by its stellar qualities and protective capabilities, but I dislike it immensely. It is a bloated download (42 MB) and contrary to public opinion, it is very difficult to configure unless you're a technician. Even then, I would imagine it is a PITA.

By comparison, the Windows 7 Firewall is relatively easy to configure and in my opinion works every bit as well as "Commode-oh" (sarcasm implied and intended).

Here's an article that explains how to configure outbound protection .. How to configure Windows Firewall for OUTBOUND traffic

 

[brkkab123]

I've heard Qindows Firewall is good enough w/ router

I tried Comodo on Vista and briefly on this computer. It's still is a pain in the neck to use and maintain. I've read in different pc magazines that state the Windows Vista/7 Firewall is good enough with a router. I also figure adding ThreatFire to MSE should cover me good enough along with Malwarebytes free.

I think that's a wise decision. I have not heard too many complimentary things about Comodo firewall.

 

[catilley1092]

I've always used the firewall that shipped with Windows, since XP. To my knowledge, it has never let me down. Also, little or no configuration is required, unless you use public wi-fi networks. With XP, you check "Don't allow exceptions", with Windows 7, this is configured when you select the type of network you're using (home, work or public).

I've tried other firewalls, but had problems configuring them, so I've decided not to fix what isn't broken.

Cat

 

[davehc]

There have been previous threads on this subject. Looking at the first post, I would not, personally, see any purpose in running two firewalls.
I am usually working in a LAN environment, and the router firewall in most cases is the better choice, as it encompasses all the computers on the network. I guess that, subject to the Administrators approval, it matters not what individual users choose to add on.

 

[brkkab123]

Comodo is a PAIN!!!

Comodo was a pain in Vista and still is in 7. I like Norton's firewall because it doesn't pester you for anything. However, I'm not paying $45-70 just for a software firewall.

brkkab123, I'll second that. Comodo receives raves reviews from many people who swear by its stellar qualities and protective capabilities, but I dislike it immensely. It is a bloated download (42 MB) and contrary to public opinion, it is very difficult to configure unless you're a technician. Even then, I would imagine it is a PITA.

By comparison, the Windows 7 Firewall is relatively easy to configure and in my opinion works every bit as well as "Commode-oh" (sarcasm implied and intended).

Here's an article that explains how to configure outbound protection .. How to configure Windows Firewall for OUTBOUND traffic

 

[brkkab123]

XP's is not so good

XP's isn't so good as it's only a one way firewall, unless they changed that in SP3. I doubt it though, as that would keep alot of people from upgrading to 7. Vista and 7's are both 2-way firewall's provided you configure the Adminidtrative Firewall or what-ever it's called. However, every computer magazine article I've read since Vista and 7 have been out say that Vista's/7's built in firewall is good enough with a router. See the router firewall will prevent malware from calling home. That's what XP's firewall, and Vista's/7's (without using Administrative firewall) won't do. The malware can do whatever it feels like in XP without a router.

I've always used the firewall that shipped with Windows, since XP. To my knowledge, it has never let me down. Also, little or no configuration is required, unless you use public wi-fi networks. With XP, you check "Don't allow exceptions", with Windows 7, this is configured when you select the type of network you're using (home, work or public).

I've tried other firewalls, but had problems configuring them, so I've decided not to fix what isn't broken.

Cat

 

[catilley1092]

This helps to explain why during my last two years of using XP Pro exclusively, even using jacked up security measures, I was constantly fighting viruses and malware. The page file was especially getting infected, as reported by both Avast & MBAM. On average, one infection per week.

The firewall issue may not have been 100% of the reason for this, but it had to play a part. My computing habits, site preferences, etc, have not changed since moving to Windows 7, but the number of infections has been reduced to only one, since Nov 2009.

This can't be just a coincidence.

Cat

 

[Nibiru2012]

I had read several years ago where it's always best to use two firewalls, a hardware one such what comes with the router and then a software one.

Perhaps I'm wrong... maybe not. I never found Comodo hard to configure but then some consider me an uber-geek capable of configuring one.

Outpost Firewall Free makes a good free firewall too. ZoneAlarm used to be good but these days is pretty lame.

Someone once stated: "One man's trash is another man's treasure.", and so also it applies to firewalls and AV software. I personally use G DATA Internet Security and it is VERY good, but you have to pay for it.

Windows 7 firewall is decent, much better than the firewall XP had for sure.

 

[catilley1092]

Also, what I overlooked in my post, the various routers that I've had (recently), has firewalls of their own. Prior to moving to Windows 7, all that I was using was a USB wi-fi adapter, and using the public library connection. I've since moved from there.

In a way, I wished I hadn't moved, as the city where I lived now offers free wi-fi in the downtown area where I lived. It's being considered here as well, but even if it does become available, I'd only use it for my notebook. The speed of the service is that of RoadRunner Lite (around 178KB/sec in this area). That would be at least a 80% reduction of speed for me.

That's the issue of having decent speed, once you have it, you don't want to go in reverse. I no longer have DL managers installed on my desktop, as Digerati noted in a previous thread, DL managers are for those who has flaky ISP's, with their lack of speed, most of which can be attributed to having antique routers, and their customers just accepting things "as they are".

Stand up to your ISP, be persistent, and sooner or later, they'll get tired of your complaining and give you decent equipment, which in keeping in line of this thread, will have a firewall of it's own.

Cat

 

[brkkab123]

Yeah Windows Firewall in XP is a no no

That's exactly why ZoneAlarm and Comodo became so popular. When I was using XP, I got 10 or more infections each time I went on the internet. With Vista from it's 01/31/2007 release until last month when I moved to 7on this computer I built, I only had 10 tracking cookies, no viruses or spyware since leaving XP.

This helps to explain why during my last two years of using XP Pro exclusively, even using jacked up security measures, I was constantly fighting viruses and malware. The page file was especially getting infected, as reported by both Avast & MBAM. On average, one infection per week.

The firewall issue may not have been 100% of the reason for this, but it had to play a part. My computing habits, site preferences, etc, have not changed since moving to Windows 7, but the number of infections has been reduced to only one, since Nov 2009.

This can't be just a coincidence.

Cat

 

[Nibiru2012]

Here is an excellent article on why one should use both hardware and software firewalls. I always have and had no issues. This is a good in depth article and covers just about situation.

Why you really, really need a firewall--or two

It's an old article but a lot of it rings true and his reasoning is sound. His recommendations for firewalls is significantly dated though.

 

[brkkab123]

Good article

That article was pretty good.

Here is an excellent article on why one should use both hardware and software firewalls. I always have and had no issues. This is a good in depth article and covers just about situation.

Why you really, really need a firewall--or two

It's an old article but a lot of it rings true and his reasoning is sound. His recommendations for firewalls is significantly dated though.

 

[etalmar]

Good article, Nibiru. Informative and written in a manner that even non technical readers can appreciate and gain some knowledge from insofar as how firewalls function.