Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="HarborFront" data-source="post: 706128" data-attributes="member: 55987">[USER=58943]@ForgottenSeer 58943[/USER]Thanks for the suggestions.Your set upModem-&gt;Router(DHCP/DNS Disabled)-&gt;Cujo(Bridged)-&gt;Switch-&gt;eBlocker(DHCP Server)is not possible if I use my existing Portal Router. I&#039;ll need another upstream router with DHCP disabled and working with my downstream Portal Router like thisInternet&nbsp; ==&gt; ONT (Optical Network Terminal) ==&gt; Another Router (upstream) ==&gt;&nbsp; CUJO (Bridge Mode) ==&gt; Portal Router (downstream) ==&gt;and I don&#039;t intend to use a&nbsp; switch for I do not have many LAN devices. I ran almost all of them using WiFi. CUJO and eBlocker work on LAN onlyOf the 3 alternatives I put up the last alternative is the most viable and the connection would beInternet&nbsp; ==&gt; ONT (Optical Network Terminal) ==&gt; Netgear Orbi Mesh Router (disabled DHCP) with Netgear Armor ==&gt;&nbsp; eBlocker (enabled DHCP)i.e. I&#039;ll need to replace my Portal Mesh Router with the Netgear Orbi Mesh Router (with Netgear Armor) and remove CUJO from the set up. The only advantage I see of CUJO is its lifetime free subscription. Netgear Armor (powered by BitDefender) requires paid subscription. One other thing about CUJO (and similar proprietary Smart Firewalls) is that it uses its own proprietary cloud AV/AM protection, machine learning and behavior analysis. If you ask me I&#039;ll say protection by BitDefender, Norton, Tend MIcro, McAfee etc is much much better.From my correspondence with eBlocker it seems they are going to test the Netgear Orbi and have malware protection added to their device.IMO, a Smart Firewall is good only for existing routers without AV/AM protection built-in. Like I mentioned, nowadays, AV companies are tieing up with router companies to incorporate their AV/AM into the routers so Smart Firewalls will not be useful.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="HarborFront, post: 706128, member: 55987"] [USER=58943]@ForgottenSeer 58943[/USER] Thanks for the suggestions. Your set up Modem->Router(DHCP/DNS Disabled)->Cujo(Bridged)->Switch->eBlocker(DHCP Server) is not possible if I use my existing Portal Router. I'll need another upstream router with DHCP disabled and working with my downstream Portal Router like this Internet ==> ONT (Optical Network Terminal) ==> Another Router (upstream) ==> CUJO (Bridge Mode) ==> Portal Router (downstream) ==> and I don't intend to use a switch for I do not have many LAN devices. I ran almost all of them using WiFi. CUJO and eBlocker work on LAN only Of the 3 alternatives I put up the last alternative is the most viable and the connection would be Internet ==> ONT (Optical Network Terminal) ==> Netgear Orbi Mesh Router (disabled DHCP) with Netgear Armor ==> eBlocker (enabled DHCP) i.e. I'll need to replace my Portal Mesh Router with the Netgear Orbi Mesh Router (with Netgear Armor) and remove CUJO from the set up. The only advantage I see of CUJO is its lifetime free subscription. Netgear Armor (powered by BitDefender) requires paid subscription. One other thing about CUJO (and similar proprietary Smart Firewalls) is that it uses its own proprietary cloud AV/AM protection, machine learning and behavior analysis. If you ask me I'll say protection by BitDefender, Norton, Tend MIcro, McAfee etc is much much better. From my correspondence with eBlocker it seems they are going to test the Netgear Orbi and have malware protection added to their device. IMO, a Smart Firewall is good only for existing routers without AV/AM protection built-in. Like I mentioned, nowadays, AV companies are tieing up with router companies to incorporate their AV/AM into the routers so Smart Firewalls will not be useful. [/QUOTE]

Verification