Advanced Plus Security ErzCrz's PC Security Config

[ErzCrz]

Just a quick not for those using WFC. You can still deploy @Andy Ful 's Firewall hardening and it will still block the connection even if you create an allow rule for it in WFC.

I created a block rule for Firefox via the Firewall Hardening Tool and have allow rules in WFC but connection still blocked See below.

 

[oldschool]

Just a quick not for those using WFC. You can still deploy @Andy Ful 's Firewall hardening and it will still block the connection even if you create an allow rule for it in WFC.

I created a block rule for Firefox via the Firewall Hardening Tool and have allow rules in WFC but connection still blocked See below.

I believe this is because rules written directly in Windows Firewall, including rules written in GPO, take precedence over 3rd party FW that use WFP.

Unlike most other Firewall programs, Minimal Firewall acts as a frontend, avoiding enlarging your computer's attack surface by playing around with lower levels of the WFP. ... When you use a WFP app, it acts as a filter on top of Windows Firewall. The problem is that Microsoft sets varying levels of importance to its firewall rules (e.g. those changed in group policy editor or related to Windows Defender may have higher importance). So if the filter and Windows Firewall rules conflict, it's not clear which one supercedes the other. Minimal Firewall avoids this by working directly with Windows Firewall without having to shut off this key part of your Windows security.

 

[Victor M]

WFC is just a shell, giving you a different UI, for modifying windows firewall rules.

 

[oldschool]

WFC is just a shell, giving you a different UI, for modifying windows firewall rules.

Indeed. But MS's own rules, and rules written to registry as with @Andy Ful's Firewall Hardening Tool or with GPO, take precedence over all other rules.

 

[Parkinsond]

Indeed. But MS's own rules, and rules written to registry as with @Andy Ful's Firewall Hardening Tool or with GPO, take precedence over all other rules.

I think block rules, regardless in WFW or in 3rd party FW take precedence over allow rules.

 

[oldschool]

I think block rules, regardless in WFW or in 3rd party FW take precedence over allow rules.

You may be right. I'm no firewall expert.

 

[ErzCrz]

For some reason I'm being just as indecisive this year. Will probably drop CFW again since CyberLock is my default-deny currently and Dan's Ransomeware Guard is a useful tool. I am, for some reason, thinking about picking up Malwarebytes for a year and see how that goes though unsure if I'd have it replace MD or go along side it if I did. Emsisoft also an option though I think MB would be lighter.

EDIT: Having either won't add to things if I go MD, DefenderUI, CyberLock, RansomwareGuard and WFC. as those already cover bases. Just one of those weird weekends I think.

 

[Halp2001]

Will probably drop CFW again since CyberLock is my default-deny currently and Dan's Ransomeware Guard is a useful tool.

 

[ErzCrz]

Thanks. I can always use WFC if I want more firewall control with Windows Firewall.

 

[ErzCrz]

Picked up ESET Security Essentials aka ESET Internet Security. CyberLock will run along side it without issue and RansomewareGuard may or may not be needed but I don't see any conflict either.

 

[ErzCrz]

Just swapped from ISP - Sky DNS to a more secure Cloudflare DNS. On and off with RansomGuard depending on what I'm doing.

 

[LinuxFan58]

I asked AI what the default setting is for HIPS of ESET, and it gives some options. Do you know what your default HIPS setting is

 

[ErzCrz]

I asked AI what the default setting is for HIPS of ESET, and it gives some options. Do you know what your default HIPS setting is
View attachment 296296

I'm in between installs experimenting with some setups but I just use whatever the default setup is rathing than tweaking it. @Shadowra is likely to have far more expertise with it than me.

 

[Shadowra]

I asked AI what the default setting is for HIPS of ESET, and it gives some options. Do you know what your default HIPS setting is

By default, ESET only protects its own files from corruption.
In smart mode, it does a little more but is still pretty poor.

I think a member of MT created some lists to boost its HIPS, I'll see if I can find them... (or I'll create my own list when I have a moment).

 

[devjitdutta2025]

By default, ESET only protects its own files from corruption.
In smart mode, it does a little more but is still pretty poor.

I think a member of MT created some lists to boost its HIPS, I'll see if I can find them... (or I'll create my own list when I have a moment).

I had sent you my custom ESET HIPS & FW rules for testing including the folder guard rules for ransomware in PM, mate. I’m not using ESET anymore but if you have time for testing it out in the future, it’ll be great .

 

[Szellem]

I had sent you my custom ESET HIPS & FW rules for testing including the folder guard rules for ransomware in PM, mate. I’m not using ESET anymore but if you have time for testing it out in the future, it’ll be great .

If I ask you nicely, would you send me these settings too? And what do you use instead of ESET?

 

[devjitdutta2025]

If I ask you nicely, would you send me these settings too? And what do you use instead of ESET?

I wish I could send you the rules mate but I’m not using ESET anymore. I’m using Norton instead albeit with custom firewall rules for PowerShell, cScript & wScript.

 

[ErzCrz]

Cloudflare was a bit hit and miss and some pages took awhile to load. Swapped it for EU4DNS DNS4EU For Public and it's actually pretty good and consistent.

 

[ErzCrz]

I'd been testing out different setups and decided to commit to the ESET / CyberLock stack and upgraded ESET to Premium Plan.

 

[TuxTalk]

I wish I could send you the rules mate but I’m not using ESET anymore. I’m using Norton instead albeit with custom firewall rules for PowerShell, cScript & wScript.

Thanks, i just add the same rules in my GDATA Firewall