Advice Request Free ESET Firewall replacement that will go well alongside ESET

[100000110101101000110]

The title sums my question up precisely.

As of now I'm using ESET SS10 under Windows 7 x64. Was quite happy with old SS versions, but as the time moves on ESET started heading in the direction that I don't really like, firstly they added some holes features for remote intrusion control (can be turned off), then they driven whole package useless when/after license expires, including firewall, leaving protected PC completely open for everything, and now when I'm looking at the next IS11 "upgrade" it just makes me sad.
Generally speaking I'm quite happy with what ESET has to offer and it protects well enough, when configured properly, but the possibility of loosing all protection in an instant is just beyond me, not even mentioning the remote access.

What am I looking for:
-Free Firewall that has the ability to:

• Deny/Allow In/Out connections for applications and services (including ALL of the ESET/Windows connections):
  • All and per Local/Remote IP/Port
  • Protocol
• Profiles for each Network
• Network attack protection or not interfere with ESET Network attack protection
• Botnet protection or not interfere with ESET Botnet protection
• Log and/or troubleshoot denied connections

Additional features are definitely a +, as long as they don't drive ESET useless.
Open Source is definitely a +.

Options and opinions are all welcomed. It might be a bunch of different software or a single solution - I don't really care, as long as it does its job and is reliable.
Thanks in advance.

 

[Deleted member 65228]

There's COMODO Firewall which is a standalone third-party Firewall. It also comes with a sandbox containment feature. I don't know how it will behave with ESET.

Your exact needs are unrealistic unless you're after a custom solution which would be quite pricey to get hold of given that features like 'Botnet protection' are quite specific and also given the fact that you don't want it to interfere with ESET. This would require the developer to be using techniques which cannot conflict with the techniques applied by ESET or understand how it works to make a work-around without causing an issue.

On that note, you will find nothing at the level of stability, security and professionalism with constant updates and being one step ahead on latest malware techniques in the wild in the open-source community for what you're after. You will possibly find utilities to list network requests being performed by other processes and the alike but not your specific needs AFAIK.

Unless you are Bruce Wayne just use ESET or find another suite which matches your needs closer. If you are Bruce Wayne however, you have more pressing concerns like maintaining your bat-mo-bil and developing your battarangs.

 

[100000110101101000110]

There's COMODO Firewall which is a standalone third-party Firewall. It also comes with a sandbox containment feature.

Your exact needs are unrealistic unless you're after a custom solution which would be quite pricey to get hold of given that features like 'Botnet protection' are quite specific and also given the fact that you don't want it to interfere with ESET. This would require the developer to be using techniques which cannot conflict with the techniques applied by ESET or understand how it works to make a work-around without causing an issue.

On that note, you will find nothing at the level of stability, security and professionalism with constant updates and being one step ahead on latest malware techniques in the wild in the open-source community for what you're after. You will possibly find utilities to list network requests being performed by other processes and the alike but not your specific needs AFAIK.

Unless you are Bruce Wayne just use ESET or find another suite which matches your needs closer.

I've ended up with Comodo as well, when I've searched for an options on the web, but still not quite sure of how many checkmarks it ticks in my list, as the feature list on the offsite is just terrible to say the least
Also asked here to check if there are any other viable options, as I don't really want to install/uninstall gazillion of firewalls just to figure out what they can and cannot do

 

[abdou17]

Stick with eset firewall which is great
Or go with Comodo firewall

 

[RoboMan]

You can always add exclusions to try to compatibilize security software but reality is you will never achieve a perfect combination when you disable parts of an antivirus in order to use a similar software.

To start with, you should never disable important modules of an antivirus. There is never a problem to disable parental control or "useless" components, but a product works as it does as a whole. Firewall, Behaviour Blocker, signatures. They work individually and as a group. Disabling firewall and adding a third-party firewall will "work" but will probably affect the general behaviour of the protection system, although no direct error messages seen.

My recommendation is and will always be to try to adjust to the way software works or uninstall it and choose another one. Maybe your solution is to add yourself to automatic license renewal to avoid license expiring.

 

[Azure]

If you use Comodo firewall with ESET nod32. Make sure to disable the HIPS in Comodo.

 

[Electr0n]

If you use Comodo firewall with ESET nod32. Make sure to disable the HIPS in Comodo.

Last time I checked @Umbra was of the opinion that disabling HIPS on comodo firewall wouldn't be enough to avoid conflict with ESET HIPS, so not sure about that. I used to use ZoneAlarm free with ESET.

 

[DeepWeb]

Why not get Eset Smart Security and avoid yourself all the trouble with conflicting programs?

 

[Deleted member 178]

Last time I checked @Umbra was of the opinion that disabling HIPS on comodo firewall wouldn't be enough to avoid conflict with ESET HIPS,

No, Never use 2 HIPS at same time; however few years ago, ESET had the option to fully disable/uninstall its HIPS module (not sure now) , With Comodo, even if you click the disable button it is still active
Comodo Internet Security's Auto-Sandbox (Containment) & HIPS interaction explanation

 

[HarborFront]

ESET firewall(and HIPS) is likely tied to other protection modules. Not having either and replacing with alternative is not advisable.

 

[illumination]

Disabling Eset Firewall and running another firewall is highly unadvisable, there would be driver conflicts from doing so. You can not as mentioned above disable HIPS completely in Comodo. You should choose one or the other, but not both. Personally, and not to start to look like Eset fanboy, I would leave Eset on, its more stable then Comodo, and Eset has one of the best firewalls/network protection and IDS I have ever had the pleasure of using.

 

[Deleted member 178]

You don't need a 3rd party software firewall on Windows since Win7. Just an outbound connection monitor is enough for most people.

 

[illumination]

You don't need a 3rd party software firewall on Windows since Win7. Just an outbound connection monitor is enough for most people.

As far as connections inbound and outbound, windows firewall is enough for that one system. The problem is, most people have more then one device now days, they have smart phones, tablets, smart DVD players, smart Tv's, ect. Network monitoring and protection is pretty much vital now when utilizing your system as the main Hub for all these devices. Eset gives you the ability to not only monitor all those devices and traffic on your network, but the ability to scan all those devices/router for vulnerabilities by simulating attacks. You certainly can not accomplish this with windows plain vanilla firewall. An added bonus with the IDS as well.

 

[Ink]

As of now I'm using ESET SS10 under Windows 7 x64.

Next time cancel your renewal for ESET Smart Security and ask ESET Support to switch your license to ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

 

[AtlBo]

To start with, you should never disable important modules of an antivirus. There is never a problem to disable parental control or "useless" components, but a product works as it does as a whole.

@RoboMan. Very well said and more and more my experience too. In hidden ways the protection modules support each other with data, so turning one off can weaken the security geometrically.

Also asked here to check if there are any other viable options, as I don't really want to install/uninstall gazillion of firewalls just to figure out what they can and cannot do

My experience with firewalls leads me to say they are behind in technology. ESET is the best firewall in the A-V business though. It's technically competent and functionally protective too. Some other firewalls out there:

Comodo-full protection but limited firewalling options compared to ESET. Hard to combine with ESET, although some tools that would work well with it such as Auto-contain and containment of the browser, etc.

Binisoft Firewall Control-Straight connection blocker. 100% does this well for a Windows firewall wrapper. Limited to standard block functions, however. Not many extras although there is some deeper thought in the program I have seen mentioned. It can/will auto-block some things...not sure what.

ZoneAlarm-Looks like there was some work done at one time. However, it also looks like the work didn't age well with time. It ends up being something along the lines of Binisoft, except with no rule editing authority and none of the attention to detail. Kind of in rags at this point, although I feel like it will make a comeback...

Private Firewall-Only mention it, because it might actually work for you. Turn off the HIPs module and see how you like the connection monitoring. Might have to reinstall it soon myself, but I fear I would be slightly disappointed by rules limitations (they're pretty decent if I recall though). The firewall is a little better than Binisoft imo, but the HIPs is way outclassed by today's malware. No password option in the program . On the plus side, it installs at like 8 MB of disk space and uses no resources almost.

FortKnox Firewall-Paid for 5 keys for $23. Irresistable price for a lifetime key. Picks up where ZoneAlarm quits and then goes on to add some of the ESET firewall capabilities. At this price, it seems like a buy to have in your software arsenal. Semi-recent development. LOL, if anyone is wondering, I noticed in a SpyStudio capture of FK activities that the lifetime key expires in 2066...data from a file in the program someplace...

Glasswire-lots of great data if you need to monitor bandwidth usage. Otherwise, no need to even look. Very well written though. Heavy on resources.

XVirus Personal Firewall Pro-Haven't tried this lately. I have a key. Anyone installed it lately?

I think the rest of the options are going to be attached to Bitdefender or Kaspersky, etc. ESET's firewall is probably better than those.

 

[Quassar]

Meaby buy some good router with end point hardware firewall instead of install some crap firewall from IS on system.

 

[100000110101101000110]

Why not get Eset Smart Security and avoid yourself all the trouble with conflicting programs?

In case that question was addressed to me, I'll quote myself:

As of now I'm using ESET SS10 under Windows 7 x64.

Disabling Eset Firewall and running another firewall is highly unadvisable, there would be driver conflicts from doing so. You can not as mentioned above disable HIPS completely in Comodo. You should choose one or the other, but not both. Personally, and not to start to look like Eset fanboy, I would leave Eset on, its more stable then Comodo, and Eset has one of the best firewalls/network protection and IDS I have ever had the pleasure of using.

But how would there be driver conflicts if one of them is disabled? Or is it just tied under the same driver with the other functionality?
I also like ESET a lot, except few things mentioned in the main post

You don't need a 3rd party software firewall on Windows since Win7. Just an outbound connection monitor is enough for most people.

Windows itself has enough reasons for me to use 3rd party firewall

Next time cancel your renewal for ESET Smart Security and asked ESET Support to switch your license to ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

That is one of the options, of course with the addition of one of the mentioned Firewalls in this thread.

@RoboMan. Very well said and more and more my experience too. In hidden ways the protection modules support each other with data, so turning one off can weaken the security geometrically.



My experience with firewalls leads me to say they are behind in technology. ESET is the best firewall in the A-V business though. It's technically competent and functionally protective too. Some other firewalls out there:

Comodo-full protection but limited firewalling options compared to ESET. Hard to combine with ESET, although some tools that would work well with it such as Auto-contain and containment of the browser, etc.

Binisoft Firewall Control-Straight connection blocker. 100% does this well for a Windows firewall wrapper. Limited to standard block functions, however. Not many extras although there is some deeper thought in the program I have seen mentioned. It can/will auto-block some things...not sure what.

ZoneAlarm-Looks like there was some work done at one time. However, it also looks like the work didn't age well with time. It ends up being something along the lines of Binisoft, except with no rule editing authority and none of the attention to detail. Kind of in rags at this point, although I feel like it will make a comeback...

Private Firewall-Only mention it, because it might actually work for you. Turn off the HIPs module and see how you like the connection monitoring. Might have to reinstall it soon myself, but I fear I would be slightly disappointed by rules limitations (they're pretty decent if I recall though). The firewall is a little better than Binisoft imo, but the HIPs is way outclassed by today's malware. No password option in the program . On the plus side, it installs at like 8 MB of disk space and uses no resources almost.

FortKnox Firewall-Paid for 5 keys for $23. Irresistable price for a lifetime key. Picks up where ZoneAlarm quits and then goes on to add some of the ESET firewall capabilities. At this price, it seems like a buy to have in your software arsenal. Semi-recent development. LOL, if anyone is wondering, I noticed in a SpyStudio capture of FK activities that the lifetime key expires in 2066...data from a file in the program someplace...

Glasswire-lots of great data if you need to monitor bandwidth usage. Otherwise, no need to even look. Very well written though. Heavy on resources.

XVirus Personal Firewall Pro-Haven't tried this lately. I have a key. Anyone installed it lately?

I think the rest of the options are going to be attached to Bitdefender or Kaspersky, etc. ESET's firewall is probably better than those.

Thanks a lot, how would you compare the overall functionality of (in case you've tried):

• FortKnox Free + NOD32 vs ESET SS/IS
• FortKnox Paid + NOD32 vs ESET SS/IS

Meaby buy some good router with end point hardware firewall instead of install some crap firewall from IS on system.

If you can suggest inexpensive one that gives an option to monitor and configure it in real time per application/service per machine - I'd go for it, why not. I'm not aware of such affordable solutions.

 

[AtlBo]

• FortKnox Free + NOD32 vs ESET SS/IS

• FortKnox Paid + NOD32 vs ESET SS/IS

Have never had an opportunity to try the two together. The firewalls seem to be similar in some respects, but the well developed features of ESET are in FortKnox I believe less developed. Also, the ESET firewall has the benefit of using information gathered by the scanner and from real-time ESET monitoring activity. Not the case with FortKnox for now.

I think the installation of FortKnox is only about 9 MB, similar to Private Firewall. Take away PF's HIPs and then add ESET type of features to it and you have FK, except that FK GUI and layout is better. Well, in the size of PF's HIPs module, how well developed can FK features be? Still the price is good for 5 keys, the developer is responsive and seems to be working on the project from time to time. I think it's more of a long term investment than now, but it's better than Comodo's firewall or Binisoft imo.

On free or paid, I have never tried the free version of FortKnox. I just bought a key on a tip from someone here (sorry I can't recall whom) and then started using the app. Had a feeling I would like it, and I do. I like more where it could go, that's the thing for me...

BTW, while you are unsure, you might give Private Firewall a look. It's only 10 MB and super clean install and removal. I think you have the option to block ranges of IPs in PF (can't remember), which could drive me back to it soon maybe on one PC. I mentioned IP ranges to the FK dev as something I would like to see. He didn't address it specifically in his reply, but maybe it could be in a future version...

 

[illumination]

But how would there be driver conflicts if one of them is disabled? Or is it just tied under the same driver with the other functionality?
I also like ESET a lot, except few things mentioned in the main post

I know absolutely nothing about coding and how conflicts could arise or how each piece of software implements their coding or how they each achieve their protection from. I will however point out that many times, if you uninstall a security application, and it leaves leftovers on the system "which are inactive" many other security suites may detect this and prompt you to remove those leftovers before you can install their product, this is due to conflicts. So to state there may very well be a conflict from disabling a firewall in one 3rd party suite and running another 3rd party firewall on the same system, seems logical to me.

 

[Deleted member 65228]

But how would there be driver conflicts if one of them is disabled? Or is it just tied under the same driver with the other functionality?

It's a case-by-case basis, not all security software works the same. If one product works closely similar to another (e.g. in terms of interception techniques), one may do additional things which the other may not but might be able to intercept and not agree with, and so on.

There's many different ways a conflict can happen.

Even if you disable a component and use another solution to cover that area, other components active in the software package you disabled a feature from could still conflict. And vice-versa. Some products may not even truly disable something, but adapt the filtering when the state is "disabled" to just not interfere with the received data.