“Protection level = None.”
Ouch.
Any thoughts? I just bought Avast 5 to support the company but I wonder if it’s best to deactive the firewall and add a free top-rated one???
Vista x64
ho-hum
another drive by 8)
And what does that mean?
Sound the alarm…All hands on deck… .this is not a drill… i repeat this is not a drill… …Batten down the hatches… everyone report to your stations… man the lifeboats… Captain we are taking in hackers and malware …Seal the main watertight doors… we have sprung a leak test… Looks like vlk will be going down with the ship… Its every man for himself. Just trying to lighten it up. I thought the same as you about the firewall test but Masoutec is not an almighty Entity .Their testing can be subjective and when a suite incorporates its technology in a integrated fashion that is not setup for their testing methods. they do not seem to adjust their testing procedures. I can only tell you that in my personal experience It stops intrusions. But alas this is one persons opinion among the hordes of Avast users world wide. : jjb2012 I think you made the right choice.
See the thread at http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=56651.msg477877#msg477877 for some comments if you are talking about Matousec’s site. He takes a rather unusual tack in his testing which is contrary to how much of the security software works.
In addition to the above, would not judge any product by a single review.
FWIW may want to browse through PCMag.com’s 2010 Security Suites: The Best and Worst.
avast! AIS 5 firewall received a 4.5 out of 5 rating.
thanks for the feedback. I went to the long running thread on Matousec. I’m familiar with the site and its limitations (they look for leaks and really focus on firewalls). But one of the Avast users summed it up in the thread with
“avast isn’t very good at leak tests…yet. The firewall is mainly inbound protection oriented. I can’t tell how good it would be at preventing an already (and silently) downloaded trojan from connecting.”
Given that even Avast, good as it is, will let a couple of percent of malware samples by (av-comparatives), then one would need something beyond an inward bound firewall (Windows is basically just that accept for those tweaking with rules).
I’m still a big fan of Avast IS and never believed that buying a firewall added much to one’s security (I do use Avast + Threatfire as added protection IN CASE something gets by Avast). Nevertheless, it might make people opt for Avast Pro rather than Avast IS.
I’m not a critic – I boast that Avast plus an extra layer (currently Threatfire) have battered out all malware for 9 years now – and I’m pretty hard on my PCs!
Vista x64
Avast 5.0418 IS
Threatfire 4.7 (setting 3)
"avast isn't very good at leak tests...yet. The firewall is mainly inbound protection oriented. I can't tell how good it would be at preventing an already (and silently) downloaded trojan from connecting."
yeah that’s from me; I’m not too worried about that. As others have mentioned too, the AV shields are incredibly powerful. Ok an unwanted outbound connection would mean that in the first place the shields didn’t detect anything, but that’s mostly in the case of rogue AVs where the user is 100% responsible for the potential disaster, as he was the one to click on a download link. For the rest, I rely on the web shield and the network shield to keep the threats away. The mail shield can also stop outbound mass mailing (done by a trojan) etc…
Also, IIRC, I mentioned too that there will be a process control interface, as already described in the help files (expert settings section for the firewall), it’s just not implemented yet. So let’s wait and see…
Process control Here you can define which programs can, and cannot, run other applications that have access to the Internet or can connect with other computers on your network. This is useful as it can prevent an incoming connection from simply launching another application, which may then be used to perform unauthorized actions. This is a trick commonly used by hackers to collect personal or sensitive information without the user's knowledge.If a program is not listed in either category, avast! will decide automatically whether or not the process should be allowed by carrying out various checks, for example whether the program that is trying to launch another application is a recognized program and one that would normally be expected to behave in this way.
I think these leak tests are completely useless. Not because avast! is suppose to perform bad, but because if anything will try to leak info, it will do that regarldess of firewall.
If something will leak info, it also depends the firewall, if the anti virus fails. If AV fails your second defense is the firewall. A good firewall will stop the malware. For example is a malware is a technique that Avast firewall fails(and the AV dont detected it) then you are unprotected it. But if you take same malware with another Firewall that passed the leak test then you are fine. So the leak tests are important, in case your AV or antimalware solutions fail.
Human error:
“that’s mostly in the case of rogue AVs where the user is 100% responsible for the potential disaster, as he was the one to click on a download link”
And someone else wrote:
“So the leak tests are important, in case your AV or antimalware solutions fail.”
Well, human error is, of course, a prime reason why things “get by” defenses.
Rather than add a bulky and annoying firewall (like Comodo) that is “leak-proof,” I add the lighter Threatfire “just in case.” Plus a Firefox add-on called “Linkextend” marks sites as safe or not by using McAfee Siteadviser, Google Safesearch, Norton, and other black/whitelists. That way, I generally avoid sites that might “drive by” or I make the mistake of clicking on a link.
(My wife didn’t know about scareware and hit the wrong “OK” or “CANCEL” button – 99% of people don’t know that you must use the Task manager to close the process and NOT touch any part of the scareware popup. Anyway, that human error caused a little trouble but Ccleaner wiped out what was in the temp cache and all is well . . .
In short, it amazes me how malware creators now “socially engineer” their droploads. Clever bastards.
Avast also has the network shield that can stop viruses and I have seen with 4.8 DCOM attacks being blocked.
The firewall may not be “leak proof” but if you stop an initial intruder or virus, what leak will actually happen? Most viruses would attempt to disable or load their own files into the low-level stack and try to evade any firewall, even those leak resistant.
Leak proofing a firewall is nice.
Ultimately, even if you leak proof the system… you can not leak proof the user.
In addition to the above, would not judge any product by a single review.
FWIW may want to browse through PCMag.com’s 2010 Security Suites: The Best and Worst.
avast! AIS 5 firewall received a 4.5 out of 5 rating.
???
no avira security suite rating in this site???