Jump to content
Posted 15 June 2009 - 12:18 PM
Posted 15 June 2009 - 02:23 PM
Posted 15 June 2009 - 04:15 PM
Posted 15 June 2009 - 05:35 PM
Posted 16 June 2009 - 02:26 AM
Edited by Someones, 16 June 2009 - 02:27 AM.
Posted 16 June 2009 - 10:45 AM
Edited by TSalarek, 16 June 2009 - 10:46 AM.
Posted 16 June 2009 - 01:43 PM
Posted 18 June 2009 - 02:15 AM
Which tests are you referring to?
Accoridng to the testers, ZA is the only wall that consistently stops outbound traffic as well as inbound. I agree with Someones' post, but would recommend changing walls from PCT to ZA.
Posted 19 June 2009 - 02:49 PM
Posted 19 June 2009 - 09:17 PM
Doesn't Shields up only test inbound protection? And who are these other research groups? BTW why would you want to block IE anyway?
GRC/Shields up...but I did some research on that and was surprised at how many research groups said the same thing.
All walls should stop both ways, and many reputable ones do, but many reputable walls also come pre-loaded with numerous exploitable permissions. ZA doesn't come with permissions so if you wanted you could even block from IE from accessing the net.
Posted 19 June 2009 - 09:41 PM
With regards to SpyBot and Tea Timer, I'd like to quote our very own Quietman7.
SpyBot Search and Destroy & Tea Timer
mvps.org is no longer recommending Spybot S&D or Ad-Aware due to poor testing results. See here - (scroll down and read under Freeware Antispyware Products).
Further, most people don't understand Spybot's TeaTimer or how to use it and that feature can cause more problems than it's worth. TeaTimer monitors changes to certain critical keys in Windows registry but does not indicate if the change is normal or a modification made by a malware infection. The user must have an understanding of the registry and how TeaTimer works in order to make informed decisions to allow or deny the detected changes. Additionally, TeaTimer may conflict with other security tools which do a much better job of protecting your computer and even prevent disinfection of malware by those tools.
More effective alternatives are Malwarebytes Anti-Malware and SUPERAntiSpyware Free.
The Internet is so big, so powerful and pointless that for some people it is a complete substitute for life.
Andrew Brown (1938-1994)
A learning experience is one of those things that say, "You know that thing you just did? Don't do that." Douglas Adams (1952-2001)
"Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination circles the world." Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Posted 23 June 2009 - 11:22 AM
Posted 24 June 2009 - 09:19 AM
I still don't really get your point, could you please clarify?
someones: if you're using something else (like say AOL) and IE decides to self launch being able to block would be a plus.
I looked at about a dozen different sites for reports on ZA, forgives if I don't waste time posting every single link.
Shields up drops an exe (which you have to personally download. It's ok - it's used only for the "does it call home" test). When you run the exe, if it's able to call back to GRC then you fail on outbound protection. What this means is that malware can exploit your holes and call home to get instructions (like orders to open more inbound ports). If Malware is prevented from calling home (like with ZA) then you have no holes to be exploited. << oversimplified,but I think you get it
Posted 25 June 2009 - 12:28 AM
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users