Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Inactive Support Threads
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Software
Security Apps
F-Secure
F-Secure & Windows Firewall Control?
Message
<blockquote data-quote="a090" data-source="post: 1032762" data-attributes="member: 99949"><p>Wow, you’re the man [USER=96829]@piquiteco[/USER]. Thank you for taking the time to screenshot your settings for me! I appreciate it because you’re using the same AV as me so these settings should work for me if they do for you.</p><p></p><p>That being said, I did notice a few things I have questions about:</p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">On the <strong><u>Rules</u></strong> tab, you chose <em>Outbound and Inbound</em>, which is listed as Not Recommended in the WFC software. Is there a particular reason why you chose that instead of the default <em>Outbound</em> option? That way your apps can have access out, but whoever they’re accessing can’t have acess back in to your system on their own. Wouldn’t making Inbound rules alongside Outbound rules be opening you up to something like that?</li> </ul><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">On the <strong><u>Security</u></strong> tab, I really like the selections you made. <em>Secure Boot</em> ensures you don’t have any accidental leakages. <em>Secure Profile</em> is essentially tamper protection for WFC. But the last one is the one that I’m curious about. It seems like with <em>Secure Rules > Disable unauthorized rules</em>, won’t that potentially block legitimately Microsoft processes? That setting should make it so that only rules created by WFC are valid. So if another application or service wants to make a rule, maybe for a Windows update or something, won’t those rules be invalid?</li> </ul><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You mentioned that you like knowing whenever any process, including F-Secure or Windows’ components, access the net. Now Windows’ processes are relatively easy to identify. They’re often Google-able and most of the time someone has already asked somewhere on Reddit about them. But for F-Secure’s processes and components, things can be a bit more difficult to identify. Are all of the alerts WFC has thrown about F-Secure been easy to identify? Are F-Secure’s connections signed (WFC shows if the app is signed or not and by whom)? Or are they all named F-Secure ABC XYZ ENTER NAME HERE? Curious how difficult it will be to identify obscure F-Secure processes, if there are any.</li> </ul><p>Thank you once again for taking the time to gather those screenshots for me. I really appreciate it mate!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="a090, post: 1032762, member: 99949"] Wow, you’re the man [USER=96829]@piquiteco[/USER]. Thank you for taking the time to screenshot your settings for me! I appreciate it because you’re using the same AV as me so these settings should work for me if they do for you. That being said, I did notice a few things I have questions about: [LIST] [*]On the [B][U]Rules[/U][/B] tab, you chose [I]Outbound and Inbound[/I], which is listed as Not Recommended in the WFC software. Is there a particular reason why you chose that instead of the default [I]Outbound[/I] option? That way your apps can have access out, but whoever they’re accessing can’t have acess back in to your system on their own. Wouldn’t making Inbound rules alongside Outbound rules be opening you up to something like that? [/LIST] [LIST] [*]On the [B][U]Security[/U][/B] tab, I really like the selections you made. [I]Secure Boot[/I] ensures you don’t have any accidental leakages. [I]Secure Profile[/I] is essentially tamper protection for WFC. But the last one is the one that I’m curious about. It seems like with [I]Secure Rules > Disable unauthorized rules[/I], won’t that potentially block legitimately Microsoft processes? That setting should make it so that only rules created by WFC are valid. So if another application or service wants to make a rule, maybe for a Windows update or something, won’t those rules be invalid? [/LIST] [LIST] [*]You mentioned that you like knowing whenever any process, including F-Secure or Windows’ components, access the net. Now Windows’ processes are relatively easy to identify. They’re often Google-able and most of the time someone has already asked somewhere on Reddit about them. But for F-Secure’s processes and components, things can be a bit more difficult to identify. Are all of the alerts WFC has thrown about F-Secure been easy to identify? Are F-Secure’s connections signed (WFC shows if the app is signed or not and by whom)? Or are they all named F-Secure ABC XYZ ENTER NAME HERE? Curious how difficult it will be to identify obscure F-Secure processes, if there are any. [/LIST] Thank you once again for taking the time to gather those screenshots for me. I really appreciate it mate! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top