Firewalls

Status
Not open for further replies.

Soulbound

Level 29
Thread author
Verified
Well-known
Jan 14, 2015
1,758
5,179
2,777
The following is for educational purposes and also lists based on my experience Firewall products that I have used in the past.

In a nutshell, a firewall monitors and controls the incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predetermined security rules.

The IPS or IDPS (Intrusion Prevention System - IPS/Intrusion Detection and Prevention System - IPDS) are security measures added to a Firewall program in its core.

Within such features, it is where it breaks down to:

Network-based Intrusion Prevention System (NIPS): monitors the entire network for suspicious traffic by analyzing protocol activity.
Wireless Intrusion Prevention System (WIPS): monitor a wireless network for suspicious traffic by analyzing wireless networking protocols.
Network Behavior Analysis (NBA): monitors network traffic to identify threats that generate unusual traffic flows, like for example distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, certain forms of malware and policy violations.
Host-based Intrusion Prevention System (HIPS): an installed software package which monitors a single host for suspicious activity by analyzing events occurring within that host.

Then we have the methods that IPS/IDPS use (usually one of the following 3):

Signature-based Detection: Signature based IDS monitors packets in the Network and then does a comparison with pre-configured and pre-determined attack patterns (signatures).
Statistical Anomaly-based Detection: A statistical anomaly-based IDS determines the normal network activity —like what sort of bandwidth is generally used, what protocols are used, what ports and devices generally connect to each other — and alerts the administrator or user when traffic is detected which is not part of its normal pattern.
Stateful Protocol Analysis Detection: Identifies protocol states deviations based on the comparing method of events observation with pre-determined profiles of existing definitions of suspicious activity.


Now some known names(disclaimer, some products discontinued while some still available but for older systems):

Sygate Personal Firewall (company was initially aquired by Symantec and since then its products discontinued). Considered one of the best firewalls at the time, going toe to toe with ZoneAlarm and Kerio/Sunbelt. - Still available to be used up to Windows XP if you still run such system
Note that Symantec uses in its Norton products such technology.

Kerio/Sunbelt Firewall - Another "giant" at the time. Kerio's firewall technology was aquired by Sunbelt and Sunbelt 4.6 Firewall still available up to Vista users. Further technology is currently present in VIPRE solutions.

PC Tools - its technology before Internet Security was known as PC Tools Firewall. Was a good firewall, however since acquired by Symantec back a few years ago, none of its firewall components technology can be found, unless they "added" to the list of Sygate code and then fully optimization to current Symantec products. Not sure exactly but its worth the mention.

Agnitum Outpost Firewall - A very good firewall which includes "Component Control" and "Anti-Leak Control" within their HIPS module. Such features are extras which monitor application behaviour to stop malicious software from infecting the system.

Comodo Personal Firewall - HIPS with additional modules (similiar achievement of Outpost, in a different way).

ZoneAlarm - Originally developed by ZoneLabs, later acquired but Check Point. If memory serves me right, it contained the TrueVector Security Engine which basically monitored the internet traffic and generated alerts for not allowed access. It also contained OSFirewall, which monitoered programs and generated alerts based on suspicious behaviours. It also contained a database of trusted program signatures, so users could benefit from existing information to allow or deny internet access based upon programs requests - known as Smart Defender Advisor.

Windows Firewall - Initially only introduced on XP SP2. It was then improved on Vista and since then the same core type of solution been shipped on Windows 7 onwards. Its iteration since vista was based on Windows Filtering Platform (WFP) (please research more on this topic if you wish to learn more about its technicallity).
It also contains outbound packet filtering.

Private Firewall, Windows Firewall Control and others: are considered "stand alone add ons" to Windows Firewall, adding additional layers of security, based on the methods described in the beginning of this post.


Now which firewall you should choose (from those available stand alone or security suites)?
Answer: Depends what you want. Look first at the different types of IPS/IDPS and its methods, then research to see what solutions incorporate what you want.

For a long time I used Sygate, then moved to Kerio/Sunbelt, ZoneAlarm, Comodo, Outpost and now just the standard Windows Firewall. Firewall components used in the past from Security Suites were: Norton, Kaspersky, ESET.

Hope this helps you when choosing what you want as a firewall in your system.

Note: not all firewall solutions were mentioned as I did not use them all in one way or another.
 
Nice information you shared there.

Among the known names mentioned, I haven't have the chance to touch the first 4.

Currently using Windows Firewall with Binisoft WFC. Would say Windows default firewall is pretty good. Just occassional pop-up alert on program updates access.
 
Nice information you shared there.

Among the known names mentioned, I haven't have the chance to touch the first 4.

Currently using Windows Firewall with Binisoft WFC. Would say Windows default firewall is pretty good. Just occassional pop-up alert on program updates access.

in fact , 3rd party firewalls were needed during the XP era , indeed XP had a very bad firewall; but since Win7 they made it pretty good. it is why now 3rd party FW added gadgets and features to add value over WF.
 
I am interested in the feature that analyzing the network traffic and detecting suspicious traffic and threats (IDS).

I know Outpost Firewall has such a feature. The IDS capability of Outpost is spoken highly of in some security forums in my country, while there are also some users saying that some threats defined by Outpost are old fashion.

I think the IPS module of SEP could also do this? I am not sure...
 
I am interested in the feature that analyzing the network traffic and detecting suspicious traffic and threats (IDS).

I know Outpost Firewall has such a feature. The IDS capability of Outpost is spoken highly of in some security forums in my country, while there are also some users saying that some threats defined by Outpost are old fashion.

I think the IPS module of SEP could also do this? I am not sure...

@Online_Sword - I have yet to find a reliable deep-packet analysis soft for home users; everything I find is for Enterprise.
 
@hjlbx

It is often mentioned that the one who has the capability of launching advanced network attack should be more interested in enterprise than home users, but I have no idea whether such kind of opinions are correct or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DracusNarcrym
in fact , 3rd party firewalls were needed during the XP era , indeed XP had a very bad firewall; but since Win7 they made it pretty good. it is why now 3rd party FW added gadgets and features to add value over WF.

Given that the significant improvement on the Windows Firewalls and the current cyber threats situation, those added features/value (like HIPS, etc) would that be a need or a want for a typical user? Typical users would refer to home users where light surfing/ gamings/ office applications/ cloud storage/ etc...

Just curious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DracusNarcrym

Given that the significant improvement on the Windows Firewalls and the current cyber threats situation, those added features/value (like HIPS, etc) would that be a need or a want for a typical user? Typical users would refer to home users where light surfing/ gamings/ office applications/ cloud storage/ etc...

Just curious.
For gamers windows firewall is enough specially online gamers.
For casual users perhaps with hips or other features can be beneficial depending on your needs.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DracusNarcrym
When i was an hardcore gamers (in WOW) i had a dedicated system for it (dual-boot), i made it the lightest possible to gain max FPS. so no AV, just Windows Firewall
 
@hjlbx

It is often mentioned that the one who has the capability of launching advanced network attack should be more interested in enterprise than home users, but I have no idea whether such kind of opinions are correct or not.

I think hacker not so interested in average person with typical $$$.

I think primary method to extract $ from typical user is\has been ransomware.

Ransomware easier for criminals since can cast very wide net, less hassle, etc... whereas firewall attack is big problem - hacker needs experience whereas criminal can just purchase ransomware.

I think good firewall without deep packet inspection is sufficient for home use.

Enterprises like deep packet inspection since it can also be used to eaves-drop, data mine and censor their employees... it is much more suited to large network management. Home user has no need of such features.
 
Firewalls are essential safety tools but we must consider that the new malware (APT for example) is able to circumvent the barriers of firewalls (on the network or endpoints) and IPS, by using non-standard ports for a particular type of application or communication protocol. Firewalls and Intrusion prevention system currently popular, fail to apply all kinds of policy to all types of traffic. Instead the more advanced malware can use ports on which are not expected or even to jump from one port to another until they find the free passage.
 
using non-standard ports for a particular type of application or communication protocol

How do you think of "closing" some ports?
I found that many old tutorials on firewall settings will explicitly specify which ports should be closed.
I wonder whether such kind of protection is essential or not.

Instead the more advanced malware can use ports on which are not expected or even to jump from one port to another until they find the free passage.

Such kind of behavior sounds like the instruction activity called "port scanning".
I think a firewall with IDS/IPS capability would be able to detect/prevent such activity, right?
 
How do you think of "closing" some ports?
I found that many old tutorials on firewall settings will explicitly specify which ports should be closed.
I wonder whether such kind of protection is essential or not.
Such kind of behavior sounds like the instruction activity called "port scanning".
I think a firewall with IDS/IPS capability would be able to detect/prevent such activity, right?
80% of new malware and intrusion attempts exploits applications that are used by users, which is of type "application layer attack", while enterprise defenses are designed with the aim of "network layer defense." Traditional firewalls also dealing with application traffic, but do it trying to identify sources of threat through the protocols and ports used by data packets. These firewalls "port and protocol based" analyzes the headers of the first transmitted packets in a session in search of port numbers used, and according to the rules that are included or not allow the passage of a certain type of traffic from "untrusted" networks to "trusted network" (Lan) or vice versa.

The use of non-standard ports, port hopping and tunneling in encrypted protocols, makes it very difficult from the firewall port and protocol based, the exact identification of applications used and which can be used to convey threats. Traditional firewalls are quite effective when applications use standard ports and protocols.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.