Firewalls and cs2

[Andres Bonilla]

I need to upgrade my Norton Firewall and antivirus, now they offered me a system works product that suppose to improve Windows performance by getting rid of all the junk accumulated. Would this type of product conflict with CS2 by running in the background? Photoshop is working beautifully but I am sure my computer could use a tune up. Woul you guys prefer a router as oppose to a software firewall? Photoshop requieres a lot of system resources I would not like to take any processing power out of it.
Thanks,

Andres

[61Dynamic]

Norton products are memory hogs so it is very possible for it to cause performance issues with PS. How much depends on what you do.

To be frank, Norton products are bloated crap. I'd recommend you use more effective products that won't suck up your systems resources like Norton (or McAffe) will. ZoneAlarm or Outpost for a firewall and for anti-virus, Nod32 or AVG.

[DarkPenguin]

AVG is an abysmal AV program.  But it is very fast.  Kaspersky is very nice.  Nod32 is supposed to be good and fast.

I'd run the windows firewall.  Since SP2 it is actually pretty decent.

[paulbk]

> ..Norton products are bloated crap

I agree 100%.

I've played around with Firewalls and Virus products these last few months. Paid for McAfee security suite, big mistake! Choaks up the whole system. You may be protected but you can't do anything. I uninstalled it after a few days.

Turns out my ISP (Charter.net) offers a FREE secutity Suite by F-Secure. I run the virus protect function only. Works good. Check with your ISP.

I use the Windows firewall BEHIND A ROUTER. Works fine and it's FREE. There is always a compromise between security level and overhead.

p

[61Dynamic]

I've never heard anything bad about AVG aside from it's gnarly looks and have had no issues myself. Why do yo think its abysmal DarkPenguin?

F-secure is another good AV program. Windows Firewall is a Joke however. Any malicious program that wants access to the Net can just make a change in the registry and bypass it completely.

[sgwrx]

i'd go with a physical router, like a linksys.  to help cut down on bad things coming in from web pages, use a browser like FireFox and download the Adblock plug-in.  you should have very few system resources lost with this setup.

** as always you have to be careful with e-mails, odd looking webpages and such.

[DarkPenguin]

Anecdotal and some personal experience.  It's detection rates are not as good as one would like.  It is the only AV I've used in a long time to let a virus past.  It also let a separate virus through on a friends machine.  Neither one of us are running around the web such that we should be high risks.  (My email address being in my sister's address book is my biggest problem.)

I had a bunch of other problems with it.  But most of those were simply personal preference in how the program operates.  If a program finds a virus it really needs to tell me about it.

Perhaps abysmal is too strong.  But I sure wasn't happy.

Anti-vir ( http://www.free-av.com/ ) is supposed to be nice.  I'm pretty sure the free version does not auto update so run the wizard by hand every now and again.

I'm using trend micro right now.  I'm not a fan but it seems to work.  I wouldn't buy it again because is uses too much in the way of resources.

[BlasR]

I agree too with Norton.Norton is trash.   I used now Panda Anti-Virus.

At www.pandasoftware.com

I can't way to transfer everything from my pc to mac, in, stop using anti-virus.

BlasR

[kbolin]

i'd go with a physical router, like a linksys. to help cut down on bad things coming in from web pages, use a browser like FireFox and download the Adblock plug-in. you should have very few system resources lost with this setup.

** as always you have to be careful with e-mails, odd looking webpages and such.

I couldn't agree more... I'm behind two physical routers and run F-Prot Antivirus and run Ad Aware PE every couple of weeks.  This with careful computing practices and I haven't had any problems in many many months (too many to count).  I'm sure the last time I had any problems would have been easily 3 or 4 years ago.

On the other hand... the kids computer is constantly choked up with viruses, pop-ups, etc. and is choked with problems.  I format that computer every 6 months or so to start fresh and tell them to stop downloading... but oh no... what do I know.  

With all this... Do Macs really have less problems with this than PC's?  I've always thought so but would like to get other comments.

[sgwrx]

I couldn't agree more... I'm behind two physical routers and run F-Prot Antivirus and run Ad Aware PE every couple of weeks.  This with careful computing practices and I haven't had any problems in many many months (too many to count).  I'm sure the last time I had any problems would have been easily 3 or 4 years ago.

spybot search and destroy is another good one. it's not unusal to find people using BOTH. though you have to watch that the one doesn't think the other is spyware.

On the other hand... the kids computer is constantly choked up with viruses, pop-ups, etc. and is choked with problems.  I format that computer every 6 months or so to start fresh and tell them to stop downloading... but oh no... what do I know. 

ugh, kids. besides those "myspace" sites, the next or probably THE biggest offender is searching for song lyrics. followed by music download and "free download" offers.

With all this... Do Macs really have less problems with this than PC's?  I've always thought so but would like to get other comments.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=61706\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

yes, macs are much less vulnerable for 2 reasons. 1. OS designers that plug holes over WIN designers who think everyone is an idiot and can't do things for themselves so leave gapping holes. 2. lack of "malicious intent" ubiquity - i mean, come on mac users are graphic artists and designers, who wants to give them a rough time

[DarkPenguin]

Backwards compatibility is a huge problem for windows.  A lot of bad code is maintained so some widget can still work.

[61Dynamic]

i'd go with a physical router, like a linksys.  to help cut down on bad things coming in from web pages, use a browser like FireFox and download the Adblock plug-in.  you should have very few system resources lost with this setup.

** as always you have to be careful with e-mails, odd looking webpages and such.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=61699\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes and no on that one. Yes on using a NAT Router as it will flat out deny any requests to access your computer unless your computer made the request for the connection/information. Here lies the problem with relying on a router only is that it will only protect you from incoming traffic. If something gets on your computer one way or another, it will be free to access the internet and do what it pleases. A software firewall will protect you in that case by requiring you to authorize outward requests.

A router alone will not protect you from anything coming in via a website or e-mail program since you gave those programs permission to access the internet to begin with. This is where using non-MS products for e-mail and web browsing is a good idea.

With all this... Do Macs really have less problems with this than PC's?  I've always thought so but would like to get other comments.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=61706\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes that's true. Macs are inherently more secure than Windows just due to the way users are handled. They are not immune though and if someone wanted to, they could cause some trouble and it is inevitable that spyware will find its way on Macs but at this point in time Macs have none of the issues of spyware or viruses.

spybot search and destroy is another good one. it's not unusal to find people using BOTH. though you have to watch that the one doesn't think the other is spyware.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=61714\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Adaware and Spybot won't report the other as spyware but Adaware will see spyware that has been secured in Spybot's quarantine files (last I used it. This may/may-not have been fixed since) so you have to clear those out before running Adaware (or just tell AW to never scan those again).

[oldcsar]

I've tested several anti-viruses and firewalls... and I've personally found that a combination of NOD32 and Outpost firewall is the best. NOD32 takes care of viruses, and then you have a firewall which has an intuitive interface. both don't take up much system resources. they've protected my system well.

stay away from norton. the only thing good from norton isn't virus software... it's Norton's Partition Magic (which I believe they bought from Powerquest).

[Andres Bonilla]

Wow!! I have only used Norton but it definitively failed the test here! Too bad I still got a few months of their virus subscription, after that I will definitively get Karspesky or Zone alarm, I will contact my ISP wich is Adelphia since their offer a free firewall.

[silvergc]

Andres, its clear here and on other sites that lots of folks don't like Norton.  What I don't understand is why.  People mention things like it being a resource hog etc.  I just checked my system and don't see it using much more memory than any other services that run in the background on my system here.  I have used Norton AV for years on my home system with no problem.  We use Symantec AV here at work (the non-consumer version of Norton AV) and have had no ill effects either.

I certainly understand that there could be better products out there, but I don't have the desire or the time to experiment for the "best" there is.  Something that is "good enough" works fine for me.  As I stated, I have had no problems with Norton tools.

BTW, this reminds me of similar discussions on Jeep discussion boards where the generally accepted opinion is that certain tranmissions or axles are trash since a friend of a friend of a friend had problems.  Although there is little first-hand experience with the failures.

I'm sure some people on this board have had problems with Norton stuff, but I could say the same about any software product ever written.  In other words, don't make a decision on AV software just at the recommendation of a few people unless they can give a concrete, first hand example of the problems any AV software has caused (and make sure they are referring to a somewhat recent release of the software).

[61Dynamic]

silvergc,
1. Norton does consume resources beyond what others do. You have to look at more than just the ram numbers in Task Manager and do so when Norton is actually doing something other than sit idle. When compared in use to other solutions, Norton makes a noticeable difference in the PC's performance. You ever notice how Norton requires about 5 different processes to run for AV when others may only need 1 or at most 3? And that's only what you can see in Task manager. There are at least two services running in the BG as well and whatever else they have hidden in the root-kit portion of the program (yes, they use a root-kit and no, not all root-kits are bad).

2. Then there is effectiveness. Norton is not that effective. I've seen more than one instance over the years where Norton just plain didn't catch a virus or a virus specifically disabled Norton.

3. Once Norton gets on a system it's a bugger to fully remove it. Running the un-installer doesn't do the full job as it leaves misc. crud all over the system, even running processes!

Norton used to be a great product. The best in the industry but then they were purchased by Symantec and have gone to crapville more and more ever since. I, as well as the others recommending against Norton, have come to our conclusions through considerable experience with the program. I'd recommend you look more into the issues Norton causes at computer-tech forums and publications. There certainly is plenty of information out there.

[silvergc]

61Dynamic

I guess I stand corrected.  Thanks for the thoughtful reply.  It was more concise and thought through than most I have read and brought up concrete examples.  Much better than the "Norton is a resource hog" and "Norton is crap" type replies people usually post.

[Andres Bonilla]

Thank you all, the reason that I wanted to upgrade or change Norton is because the common client gets corrupted easily and interferes with electronic e-mail and worse it disables the firewall, I called tech support and they said the best method is to upgrade to a new version and yes uninstalling the present version is a chore, you have to actually go in the registry that is very scary for me.

Thanks again,

Andres

[wolfnowl]

I called tech support and they said the best method is to upgrade to a new version and yes uninstalling the present version is a chore, you have to actually go in the registry that is very scary for me.

Working with the registry can be a little daunting . . .  Just keep in mind that the changes to the registry can turn your computer into a paperweight, so remember to back up the entire registry before making any changes.  I'd check back with technical support - sometimes they can tell you EXACTLY what lines to alter/ remove.

Mike.