You absolutely CAN run ZA and WF simultaneously, but to no advantage. ZA
will turn off the WF, BUT ONLY IF IT IS CONFIGURED TO DO SO. Note that if
you DO allow it to turn off WF, it will automatically turn it back on should
you have a need to disable ZA. If you understand the two-way nature of a
good software firewall product and don't mind building allowed exception
tables, ZA is an excellent security enhancement tool and creates minimal
system overhead. Software firewalls can annoy the less experienced user
because they essentially block everything by default, prompting you to choose
to allow exceptions on a case-by-case or permanent basis. Once your table of
permitted exceptions is populated with your common programs, etc. the initial
annoyance is alleviated, however.

NOTE: Best security practice is to use BOTH a hardware and software (i.e.,
"host") firewall as well as good anti-virus software.

J


"Dave C" wrote:

> I've been advised to install the free edition of Zone Alarm firewall even
> though I still have XP Home Edition firewall installed. The person said they
> can both run at once. Is this true? Is it a good idea?

Rick wrote:

> Windows firewall will not stop your computer from going places that
> might be unwise to go to.

Neither will ZoneAlarm. Thinking user stupidity can be solved
technologically is a fallacy to be avoided.

Rick wrote:

> Windows firewall will not stop your computer from going places that
> might be unwise to go to.

Neither will ZoneAlarm. Thinking user stupidity can be solved
technologically is a fallacy to be avoided.

Dave C wrote:

> I've been advised to install the free edition of Zone Alarm firewall even
> though I still have XP Home Edition firewall installed. The person said
> they can both run at once. Is this true? Is it a good idea?

Bad plan. Windows Firewall is good enough for people who have enough common
sense not to run untrusted binaries or browse potentially hostile websites
in IE. If you have a router running as a firewall between you and the
internet, no need to install one at all on a desktop.

ZoneAlarm is snake oil. http://www.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html

Dave C wrote:

> I've been advised to install the free edition of Zone Alarm firewall even
> though I still have XP Home Edition firewall installed. The person said
> they can both run at once. Is this true? Is it a good idea?

Bad plan. Windows Firewall is good enough for people who have enough common
sense not to run untrusted binaries or browse potentially hostile websites
in IE. If you have a router running as a firewall between you and the
internet, no need to install one at all on a desktop.

ZoneAlarm is snake oil. http://www.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html

P. Johnson wrote:
> Dave C wrote:
>
>> I've been advised to install the free edition of Zone Alarm firewall
>> even though I still have XP Home Edition firewall installed. The
>> person said they can both run at once. Is this true? Is it a good
>> idea?

They CAN both be run at the same time, but the windows FW is redundant to
some of the ZA functions, and ZA does a lot more as far as protecting things
goes.
The general concensus it to NOT run multiple firewalls for a lot of
reasons, including but not limited to, having two places to make changes to
when you want to allow an access (or maybe not, depending), which can
generate quite a bit of confusion for the less experienced use. In addition
there are some strange things that can happen when two firewalls
accidentally step on each other. I won't go into that because it's a long
story. However, no damage to your computer will result by running ZA and
the MS firewall.
Realize also that ZA provides both incoming and outgoing protection; it
would keep your computer from becoming a zombie for instance, which the
windows firewall would not. ZA free or paid is a great tool and highly
recommended in most circles.

>
> Bad plan. Windows Firewall is good enough for people who have enough
> common sense not to run untrusted binaries or browse potentially
> hostile websites in IE.

That's untrue. The only real difference between the MS firewall and ZA
besides look and user friendliness (ZA is better), is that the MS firewall
only monitors incoming traffic where ZA monitors it both ways; and adds a
lot more features.

If you have a router running as a firewall
> between you and the internet, no need to install one at all on a
> desktop.

No. If you have a NAT router, then you might be in pretty good shape, but a
software firewall is still a very good idea. NAT will not catch certain
things. Other routers may not catch anything and don't necessarily provide
any firewalling.
In general, it appears lately from a couple of papers I've read that a
combination of a NAT router and ZA is actually one of the best combinations
you can set up right now.

If you want to see how your firewall is going, go to grc.com and let them
run some port tests on your machine. They're perfectly safe, above board
and highly respected for this purpose. GRC is Steve Gibson's Research
center. He writes an incredible amount of very efficient code and put is up
for the taking, all freeware.

>
> ZoneAlarm is snake oil. http://www.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html

That link isn't functional right now so I can't see what you're referring
to, but your ignorance of firewalls and online security is showing. You've
lucked out and made my "ignore" list for passing misinformation. Get real
or don't post, please.

Pop`

P. Johnson wrote:
> Dave C wrote:
>
>> I've been advised to install the free edition of Zone Alarm firewall
>> even though I still have XP Home Edition firewall installed. The
>> person said they can both run at once. Is this true? Is it a good
>> idea?

They CAN both be run at the same time, but the windows FW is redundant to
some of the ZA functions, and ZA does a lot more as far as protecting things
goes.
The general concensus it to NOT run multiple firewalls for a lot of
reasons, including but not limited to, having two places to make changes to
when you want to allow an access (or maybe not, depending), which can
generate quite a bit of confusion for the less experienced use. In addition
there are some strange things that can happen when two firewalls
accidentally step on each other. I won't go into that because it's a long
story. However, no damage to your computer will result by running ZA and
the MS firewall.
Realize also that ZA provides both incoming and outgoing protection; it
would keep your computer from becoming a zombie for instance, which the
windows firewall would not. ZA free or paid is a great tool and highly
recommended in most circles.

>
> Bad plan. Windows Firewall is good enough for people who have enough
> common sense not to run untrusted binaries or browse potentially
> hostile websites in IE.

That's untrue. The only real difference between the MS firewall and ZA
besides look and user friendliness (ZA is better), is that the MS firewall
only monitors incoming traffic where ZA monitors it both ways; and adds a
lot more features.

If you have a router running as a firewall
> between you and the internet, no need to install one at all on a
> desktop.

No. If you have a NAT router, then you might be in pretty good shape, but a
software firewall is still a very good idea. NAT will not catch certain
things. Other routers may not catch anything and don't necessarily provide
any firewalling.
In general, it appears lately from a couple of papers I've read that a
combination of a NAT router and ZA is actually one of the best combinations
you can set up right now.

If you want to see how your firewall is going, go to grc.com and let them
run some port tests on your machine. They're perfectly safe, above board
and highly respected for this purpose. GRC is Steve Gibson's Research
center. He writes an incredible amount of very efficient code and put is up
for the taking, all freeware.

>
> ZoneAlarm is snake oil. http://www.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html

That link isn't functional right now so I can't see what you're referring
to, but your ignorance of firewalls and online security is showing. You've
lucked out and made my "ignore" list for passing misinformation. Get real
or don't post, please.

Pop`

P. Johnson wrote:
> Dave C wrote:
>
>> I've been advised to install the free edition of Zone Alarm firewall even
>> though I still have XP Home Edition firewall installed. The person said
>> they can both run at once. Is this true? Is it a good idea?
>
> Bad plan. Windows Firewall is good enough for people who have enough common
> sense not to run untrusted binaries or browse potentially hostile websites
> in IE. If you have a router running as a firewall between you and the
> internet, no need to install one at all on a desktop.
>

Nonsense.

If you use a router with NAT, it's still a very good idea to use a
3rd party software firewall. Like WinXP's built-in firewall,
NAT-capable routers do nothing to protect the user from him/herself
(or any "curious," over-confident teenagers in the home). Again --
and I cannot emphasize this enough -- almost all spyware and many
Trojans and worms are downloaded and installed deliberately (albeit
unknowingly) by the user. So a software firewall, such as Sygate or
ZoneAlarm, that can detect and warn the user of unauthorized out-going
traffic is an important element of protecting one's privacy and
security. (Remember: Most anti-virus applications do not even scan for
or protect you from adware/spyware, because, after all, you've
installed them yourself, so you must want them there, right?)

I use both a router with NAT and Sygate Personal Firewall, even
though I generally know better than to install scumware. When it
comes to computer security and protecting my privacy, I prefer the old
"belt and suspenders" approach. In the professional IT community,
this is also known as a "layered defense." Basically, it comes down
to never, ever "putting all of your eggs in one basket."


> ZoneAlarm is snake oil. http://www.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html
>
>

Lies.

--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell

P. Johnson wrote:
> Dave C wrote:
>
>> I've been advised to install the free edition of Zone Alarm firewall even
>> though I still have XP Home Edition firewall installed. The person said
>> they can both run at once. Is this true? Is it a good idea?
>
> Bad plan. Windows Firewall is good enough for people who have enough common
> sense not to run untrusted binaries or browse potentially hostile websites
> in IE. If you have a router running as a firewall between you and the
> internet, no need to install one at all on a desktop.
>

Nonsense.

If you use a router with NAT, it's still a very good idea to use a
3rd party software firewall. Like WinXP's built-in firewall,
NAT-capable routers do nothing to protect the user from him/herself
(or any "curious," over-confident teenagers in the home). Again --
and I cannot emphasize this enough -- almost all spyware and many
Trojans and worms are downloaded and installed deliberately (albeit
unknowingly) by the user. So a software firewall, such as Sygate or
ZoneAlarm, that can detect and warn the user of unauthorized out-going
traffic is an important element of protecting one's privacy and
security. (Remember: Most anti-virus applications do not even scan for
or protect you from adware/spyware, because, after all, you've
installed them yourself, so you must want them there, right?)

I use both a router with NAT and Sygate Personal Firewall, even
though I generally know better than to install scumware. When it
comes to computer security and protecting my privacy, I prefer the old
"belt and suspenders" approach. In the professional IT community,
this is also known as a "layered defense." Basically, it comes down
to never, ever "putting all of your eggs in one basket."


> ZoneAlarm is snake oil. http://www.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html
>
>

Lies.

--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell