On 29 Nov 2006 at 18:14, AnnaSummers wrote:

> You should only run one firewall and not Microsoft's - it does not restrict 
> outgoing data, which makes it pretty worthless.  ZoneAlarm is free and works 
> just fine!

  I believe this was also a problem with BlackICE.  This was a reasonable 
way for a network firewall to operate around 1993, but it's not adequate for 
the modern environment.
  On the other hand, it's better than nothing.
 
> I have the same problem with Microsoft's firewall turning itself back on - 
> mucho annoying - and haven't taken the time to figure out how to get it to 
> stay off - has anyone out there???  One MORE reason I am very sorry I bought 
> XP SP2 instead of sticking with SP1.   I really regret buying it and it was 
> too expensive to buy another one.  I have been using SP1 for YEARS, and have 
> never gotten a single virus/trojan etc.  With SP2, I had to reinstall my 
> entire machine twice in the first month because of viruses.  I listened to 
> others about SP2 instead of relying on my own judgement and I truly regret 
> it.

  I don't believe Lewis' issue has anything to do with the MS firewall 
"turning itself back on".  Rather, his issue is with SpybotSD not 
understanding the mchanism by which ZA tells the Security Center NOT to 
complain that the MS firewall ISN'T turned on.  (As far as SpybotSD knows, 
until told differently, some piece of malware has disabled the MS firewall 
and tweaked the registry to prevent SC from warning the user about it.)
 
> P.S.  I just got word that Microsoft is restricting third party vendors' 
> access to VISTA kernel because they are trying to shut everyone else out of 
> the security market and will be SELLING (not including with the OS) their 
> own security software separately from Windows VISTA.  Another reason I won't 
> be using VISTA.

  The latest I've been hearing seemed to suggest that Microsoft has been 
negotiating a compromise with Symantec, CA, etc to resolve this.  Certainly 
there are concerns about things that are changing in VISTA which can be 
either very good or very bad, depending on how well Microsoft can make them 
work.  I would not suggest that anyone try to make a final decision, for or 
against, based on beta versions, rumours and speculations.  We won't really 
know whether they've made it work until after the real product gets released 
and used for a bit.
  [Hopefully, if it's hard for third parties to install themselves into the 
kernel, that will be much harder on malware authors than on legitimate 
security companies.  On the other hand, Microsoft is working on a scheme to 
limit functionality of the system if a chunk of code decides to doubt 
whether the copy you're running is properly paid for -- experience with XP 
activation and the several generations of WGA should have taught us all that 
getting this code right may be beyond Microsoft's (or anyone's) capability.]

David Gillett

        The NOSPIN Group has added a new feature on our website,
           web based bulletinboard for questions and answers:
              Visit our sister website at http://nospin.com