> I used to use ZoneAlarm, but found it source-consuming in Vista. I am
> wondering if the Vista firewall is worse than independent firewall, such
> as Zone Alarm or not? I don't see any reports from vista firewall, and I
> am suspicious of its strenth against the attack from internet.
> Any opinions?
As it is, Vista's built-in firewall solution is more than
adequate for most consumers' needs. While it's not quite up to the
ease-of-use standards of Kerio or ZoneAlarm, it has been noticeably
improved over WinXP's version.
There are two interfaces for Vistas built-in firewall:
1) A simplified one accessed through the Control Panel that is the only
one most people see. To further supplement this view, Sphinx's Vista
Firewall Control http://sphinx-soft.com/Vista/
) is a piece of freeware
that makes the Vista Firewall much more useful to the average user.
2) And the more advanced "Windows Firewall with Advanced Security
(WF.msc), accessed via the Start Menu's Administrative Tools folder, for
the experienced user who wants more granular control.
Having said that, it's important to remember that firewalls and
anti-virus applications, which should always be used and should always
be running, while important components of "safe hex," cannot, and should
not be expected to, protect the computer user from him/herself.
Ultimately, it is incumbent upon each and every computer user to learn
how to secure his/her own computer, and how to safely briwse the Internet.
Help us help you:
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
The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot