Security Basics mailing list archives
Re: Client End Firewalls
From: GuidoZ <uberguidoz () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 23:02:59 -0700
It could certainly be an overhead for an admin - however so would having a malicious worm be on the loose in your network... or a backdoor trojan sitting open to the world. It may be a choice between the lesser of two evils. As for ZoneAlarm on dial-up - you betcha I'd recommend it! The scanning exploit worms could care less if you have a high speed connection or not. Being online is being online - even if your IP# changes and you have a slower speed. It doesn't take long for things like Sasser or MSBlaster to take hold of your system. Wouldn't you rather be protected when the next one comes along? P.S. The Windows Firewall is supposed to protect you from situations like I described above. That doesn't mean it will. Google "disable windows firewall" and see just how easy it is to do so - remotely. (Same goes for any software firewall that doesn't have the settings passworded.) -- Peace. ~G On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 22:50:44 -0600, Dell <tekwannabe () peoplesources org> wrote:
Would this not be an overhead for admins, not to mention the learning curb? Also, would anyone recommend Zone Alarms for someone who is on dialup? Thanks, D. ----- Original Message ----- From: <Grant.Orchard () aws aust com> To: <security-basics () securityfocus com> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 10:27 PM Subject: Client End FirewallsHi guys, How much protection do you believe client side firewalls provide? My boss has asked for my thoughts on a system like Zone Labs are now offering. Can anyone provide me with their thoughts on what benefits this actually provides? Many thanks Grant Orchard NOTICE - This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential. It may contain privileged information or copyright material. You should not read, copy, use or disclose it without the written authorisation of AWS. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact AWS by return e-mail and then delete both messages. AWS does not accept liability in connection with computer virus, data corruption, delay, interruption, unauthorised access or unauthorised amendment.
Current thread:
- Re: Client End Firewalls, (continued)
- Re: Client End Firewalls Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers (Oct 01)
- Re: Client End Firewalls GuidoZ (Oct 04)
- Re: Client End Firewalls Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers (Oct 08)
- Re: Client End Firewalls GuidoZ (Oct 12)
- Re: Client End Firewalls Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers (Oct 18)
- Re: Client End Firewalls GuidoZ (Oct 19)
- Re: Client End Firewalls Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers (Oct 20)
- Re: Client End Firewalls GuidoZ (Oct 28)
- RE: Client End Firewalls Jef Feltman (Oct 30)
- Re: Client End Firewalls GuidoZ (Oct 04)
- Re: Client End Firewalls Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers (Oct 01)
- Re: Client End Firewalls GuidoZ (Oct 05)
- Re: Client End Firewalls xyberpix (Oct 07)
- Re: Client End Firewalls Ken S (Oct 07)
- Re: Client End Firewalls GuidoZ (Oct 08)
- Message not available
- RE: Client End Firewalls Bryan S. Sampsel (Oct 06)
- Re: Client End Firewalls Josh Mills (Oct 07)
- Re: Client End Firewalls Ken S (Oct 07)