• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About iWarren

  • Rank
    Forum Regular

Recent Profile Visitors

2922 profile views
  1. do you trust so much in your hardware, that there is no room for software protection?
  2. i have told everyone my settings of what i needed, in past posts.... how about a little transparency... or is this a case of bill gates using linux? If we're all in the same boat, we're more likely to try to prevent it from sinking.
  3. over time i discovered i needed what IP's to allow for svchost, as the bare minimum to connect.... i think, if Emsisoft is going to throw us to the dogs, they need to tell us the bare minimum, of what we need to change.... to keep us secure. If you won't let us use your firewall to connect with the bare minimum settings.... then you should offer a configuration, and telling us what Windows Firewall settings we NEED to change. And if you dare say that Windows Firewall has the perfect configuration as it currently is, as a default setup..... then i will know you are full of it. Because Windows is designed to connect with everything under the sun for compatability.
  4. short of Christian, who I think is the main developer of this suite.... giving us exact firewall rules for Windows. I will never feel secure with the changes made here.
  5. i had a similar setup with Charter before... its internet service.... directly through a modem setup. a firewall setup is crucial, and who wants to remove edit, delete, add all of the existing rules. has anyone even iterated through the current microsoft rules... is there not a rule to allow Windows Media Player? Seriously, who uses that, and feels safe about their computer.
  6. i have had some time over the past week or two, to consider the things i've said here... and how i felt about the EIS change. I still, sincerely wish that it was the same... the setting changes were so simplistic in nature.. if only you could overlay your firewall protection, with that of the Microsoft Firewall. but anyways. I accept this is the direction you have chosen. I went with Comodo, and the protection is the same... but not equal, i do highly enjoy its verbosity in whats going on, but sometimes its like i say something is "okay", like i did with Emsisoft, and I keep getting pestered with additional messages, lol and its like, even those don't "stick" anyways, thats not your problem, as a programmer, i appreciate your choice... i know doing what you did, was never easy. and I regret now, my support messages i put in with complaints, lol well... i still wanted things fixed, but i wanted them fixed on your terms. To this day, I sincerely believe you had a better firewall protection system. So regardless of what has been said, or what has been done, you did a good thing... in the time, that it was needed. Companies like Microsoft have thousands of people, and you are just 1 person, but... just know, the people who really loved this system, had faith in a common principle. That it took but just 1 small stone to take down goliath. Looking professional is one thing.... but being professional, is quite another.
  7. maybe the purpose of our sense of security, was not just for the peace of mind it brought us. but it was to find each other. lol others.... who are interested in securing our systems. and making sure no one is taken advantage of.
  8. The Firewall tab has been removed, and don't be fooled by the Application Rule firewall settings... as i don't think those are currently working. i think the "filter" is still in place, but the functionality is gone. am i wrong?
  9. as far as i can tell, the conversion has already taken place, as its no longer blocking through the emsisoft firewall.
  10. I call this one..... 'Fabian UNLEASHED'
  11. that is why i block mspaint, because they're all after my valuable artwork.
  12. This looks interesting. https://store.netgate.com/SG-1000.aspx
  13. Of course a hardware firewall is always best, but routers/modems each have their own vulnerabilities of their own to be exploited, and i think a good portion of router companies, rather than keep patching firmware for aging technology, focus their efforts on software for more modernized microchips and components. my past couple modems/routers, it seems like when it comes to port forwarding, there is always some sort of glitch.. or some little quirk. so I sometimes have to allow a few more ports, which is why a software firewall becomes much more important to me. as a second line of defense. to this, you might say, that I just need to get a better router/modem, and that is one solution, but there are many people with old tech, who just want to find a way to make it work for them. be it through software firewall, or otherwise. although a software firewall might be a "niche" product, the people who do use it, often are quite fond of it. this is a perfect example of how a "pay as you go" service fails you... because it might be only a matter of time, before your favorite program is changed to something undesirable. Instead of just purchasing a stand-alone programs, that won't force you to change... I can for-see Microsoft will probably alienate people much the same way..... eventually adding/subtracting features from the system, just because they deem it useful, or non-useful. If we have learned anything from Windows 10 vs Windows 7, it is that people don't like change forced upon them, and that they must embrace that change on their own.
  14. If it is coded correctly, software 'is' like a house, that you build it once and then don't need to touch it for ages. Maybe if you're coding for multiple operating systems.... it might be cumbersome, keeping up with Microsofts re-gearing of architecture. but once you have the foundation laid down... it becomes a matter of bug fixes, while some can be time consuming... eventually as it becomes refined, you have less and less problems.... Now consider.... that even more time will need to be taken, removing all of the code associated with the firewall, reworking the GUI, and then... refocusing efforts on "protecting" the Windows firewall, add to that... the time explaining to users what happened to their features... and on top of that, the finances, of potential loss of customers, and extending licenses. All of this time could have just been spent 'maintaining' the existing infrastructure... which already had a decent foundation laid already. As a developer myself, I'd rather fix a few bugs, and deal with a few intermittent support requests, than to take a step backwards. Security is like a chain, any weakness in any one of the links, results in the compromised integrity of the chain. I've taken a look at the Windows Firewall. I'm not a networking expert by far, but I have used computers for the better part of my life, and I found so many foreign settings in Windows Firewall, if I ever did use it... i will literally have to school myself in Google to find out what all of the settings even mean. If someone who is familiar with computers doesn't know what half of these settings are..... you can be certain that your clientele who has been spoiled with over-simplification will have no idea what these settings do. and its just common sense, that an Improperly configured setup, can be linked back to security vulnerabilities.