Filseclab Firewall
in [Freeware]
|
Prev: Fixing a scratched DVD- an observation
Next: pdf reader
From: Franklin on 22 Sep 2005 06:41 >> Am running on XP Pro rather than your Win2k. >> >> I haven't noticed the cpu at all. Maybe once there are a lot >> of rules or the rules get complicated (through fine tuning the >> Advanced settings for each rule) then more power might be >> needed. I haven't noticed that yet. >> >> Personally I found Zone Alarm used more cpu than I wanted, >> Sygate was lighter than ZA on cpu but (for the time being) >> Filesclab seems lighter still. >> On Sat 17 Sep 2005 22:58:41, Kerodo wrote: <news:MPG.1d96316d81e4aecd989682(a)news.west.cox.net> > > Sounds like you're having better luck than I. That's good. > Filseclab is a nice product with good potential for sure. I am > keeping an eye on it as it develops. > > Another one you might like, which seems very light and > interesting is SensiveGuard. I am experimenting with it now and > like it. Seems to have potential and they are responsive to > emails on problems and so on. > > http://www.sensiveguard.com/ Those screenshots of SensiveGuard really do look very promising. They look like providing the level of control which I want from a firewall. Hmmm, I'm tempted to try out SensiveGuard. But I don't want to keep unstalling & unistalling firewalls. I remember the amount of stuff which early version of Zone Alarm left behind after being uninstalled. I recall that these hard to remove remenants of Zone Alarm could interfere with other firewalls. I know this might sound very strange: have you tried installing both Filesclab and SensiveGuard on the SAME system and then enabling one or the other according to your preference?
From: Kerodo on 22 Sep 2005 13:38
In article <96D976E2EA6EB71F3M4(a)204.153.244.156>, no_thanks(a)mail.com says... > I know this might sound very strange: have you tried installing > both Filesclab and SensiveGuard on the SAME system and then > enabling one or the other according to your preference? > Although this sounds tempting, it is generally considered unwise. Most likely it will cause conflicts when the OS loads drivers and so on. I did try it once with Kerio 2 and Outpost and got BSODs, even though I had Kerio disabled completely. So just the presence of another firewall can cause problems, even when disabled. I'd stick to one or the other myself. I know some claim to have ZA unistall problems, but I have never had any personally. But there is some risk always. It's a good idea to have a good image or backup of your HD before changing things. Last time I reformatted and reinstalled Win2k here, I did an immediate image of the HD after install. Servers me well. I can try new software and screw things up and then it just takes 10 minutes to restore to a clean system again. Very handy. -- Kerodo |