Value of Sensiveguard freeware firewall ?

Does anybody know where I can find independent evaluation of the
"Sensiveguard" firewall (http://www.sensiveguard.com/MoreInfo.html) ?
How does it compare with more reknown ones?
I am busy considering to switch from sygate personal firewall because
- SPF is no more maintained
- SPF is to well known by virus authors : it was easily deactivated by
several virus attacks on my PC. That's why I am considering less known ones.

Thanks

Marc

M L

M L wrote:
> "Sensiveguard" firewall (http://www.sensiveguard.com/MoreInfo.html) ?
> How does it compare with more reknown ones?

You mean with other bullshit or something that actually works?

> I am busy considering to switch from sygate personal firewall because
> - SPF is no more maintained
> - SPF is to well known by virus authors : it was easily deactivated by
> several virus attacks on my PC.

That's a trivial thing to any

> That's why I am considering less known ones.

This doesn't resolve a ****ed-up system.

Sebastian Gottschalk

Sebastian Gottschalk wrote:
> M L wrote:
>
>>"Sensiveguard" firewall (http://www.sensiveguard.com/MoreInfo.html) ?
>>How does it compare with more reknown ones?
>
>
> You mean with other bullshit or something that actually works?
>
>
>>I am busy considering to switch from sygate personal firewall because
>>- SPF is no more maintained
>>- SPF is to well known by virus authors : it was easily deactivated by
>>several virus attacks on my PC.
>
>
> That's a trivial thing to any
>
>
>>That's why I am considering less known ones.
>
>
> This doesn't resolve a ****ed-up system.

So if I do understand your own words your answer is full of trivial
****ed-up bullshit?

Effectively this does not help much ...

Marc

M L

M L wrote:

> So if I do understand your own words your answer is full of trivial
> ****ed-up bullshit?

So your posting was. Guess what? To get a good answer you first need to
ask reasonable questions.

> Effectively this does not help much ...

OK, then just reparaphrized:

1. "Sensiveguard" firewall does application control, so what do you
expect? The trial is useless and just increases complexity, Sygate PFW
and other PFWs aren't any better. The rule configuration simply sucks,
doesn't even allow to reference TCP states. Nonsense features like
automatic blocking, content filtering, lame excuses of IDS...

2. Well, a virus disabled your Sygate PFW? If you're running your user
account with admin rights, then you shouldn't wonder anyway and
understand that nothing will ever be able to protect you under such
circumstances. If you had restricted rights, then something went pretty
wrong and Sygate PFW is to blame for it.

3. Choosing a less known software doesn't resolve any of the issues
stated above. Your system is a mess, your security concept is a mess and
almost non-existent. I guess you can't even tell what you want your
system to protect from and why you chose Sygate PFW for that job,
neither will your answer be consistent with real world facts.


Your initial posting sounded to me like that:

Anyone has experiences with SnakeOil Megasoft? How does it compare to
other snakeoil?
I consider switching from Platinum Snakeoil Pro because
- it's not supported anymore
- it got frozen when putting it into the refridgerator, which the
package promised to not happen (besides other unfullfillable promises)
Hopefully a less known snakeoil won't freeze, because the refridgerator
doesn't know it.

Sebastian Gottschalk

In article <43f828f7$0$1160$>,
says...
> Does anybody know where I can find independent evaluation of the
> "Sensiveguard" firewall (http://www.sensiveguard.com/MoreInfo.html) ?
> How does it compare with more reknown ones?
> I am busy considering to switch from sygate personal firewall because
> - SPF is no more maintained
> - SPF is to well known by virus authors : it was easily deactivated by
> several virus attacks on my PC. That's why I am considering less known ones.

Without getting into any of the 'security' arguments, SensiveGuard would
not really be any better than Sygate, in fact probably not as good. I
tried to help them debug it for a while just for fun, but it still has a
memory leak and it sometimes also blocks file system access without
prompting, which is an annoying pain in the ass. It has some other odd
behaviors relating to network traffic also.

It does look interesting since it's so light and fairly simple, but I
think overall it's not much of a solution. I'd stick with Sygate, or
try something else a little more mainstream. If you insist on using
something less known then I'd go with Jetico perhaps.

At any rate, in a nutshell: Forget SensiveGuard..


--
Kerodo

Kerodo

Kerodo wrote:
> In article <43f828f7$0$1160$>,
> says...
>
>>Does anybody know where I can find independent evaluation of the
>>"Sensiveguard" firewall (http://www.sensiveguard.com/MoreInfo.html) ?
>>How does it compare with more reknown ones?
>>I am busy considering to switch from sygate personal firewall because
>>- SPF is no more maintained
>>- SPF is to well known by virus authors : it was easily deactivated by
>>several virus attacks on my PC. That's why I am considering less known ones.
>
>
> Without getting into any of the 'security' arguments, SensiveGuard would
> not really be any better than Sygate, in fact probably not as good. I
> tried to help them debug it for a while just for fun, but it still has a
> memory leak and it sometimes also blocks file system access without
> prompting, which is an annoying pain in the ass. It has some other odd
> behaviors relating to network traffic also.
>
> It does look interesting since it's so light and fairly simple, but I
> think overall it's not much of a solution. I'd stick with Sygate, or
> try something else a little more mainstream. If you insist on using
> something less known then I'd go with Jetico perhaps.
>
> At any rate, in a nutshell: Forget SensiveGuard..
>
>

Thanks !
I will try Jetico

Marc

M L