Is the Firewall still relevant today?

[HarborFront]

this is nonsense... how can you come up with that foolish idea...seriously...

no.

yes but not network attacks.

for outbound connection monitoring, you need a FW , not an anti-exe or whatever.

worthless for home users. your NAT router will care of this.

Yes

Like I mentioned what is the probability of a home user being DDoS or targeted by a hacker? So network attacks is practically zero here? Have your home PC being network attacked before? Not in my lifetime so far?

I said to use Terra Privacy too for stopping rouge outbound connection

 

[HarborFront]

They can't if they aren't firewalls LOL , they don't monitor traffic...
you don't want any FW on your system, buy a 5000$ hardware firewall or setup PFsense. via a proxy machine.

The aim is to prevent incoming malware infections. Monitor incoming traffic for what reason? How often do you look at your firewall to see and monitor incoming traffic?

 

[kamla5abi]

Most of the time we have strong protection against inbound attacks from malware in the use of other security software. As for inbound attack by hackers, like using DDoS, I think that's negligible to a home user.

you know what botnets are?
you know how many home user computers are involved in botnets?
you are right that average home user will probably not need to worry about DDoS attack, but becoming victim of other inbound attack is not impossible or so negligible that you not use built in windows firewall even

Firewall is like a gatekeeper in a gated community...see's network traffic coming in/out over network protocols (cars go in/out of gated community)
AV/etc software is like you putting locks/bars/etc on your doors, windows, and alarms/motion detectors/etc on your house (try to make it hard to break into your house, and if they do break in, try to mitigate the damage they can do by sealing off rooms from one another)

if attack from outside --> into gated community, gatekeeper will have chance to stop that
if they get past gatekeeper, then your locks/bars/alarms/etc will try to stop them from breaking into your house
if they break into your house, your security system still tries to limit the damage they can cause by sealing off rooms from one another (so they break into living room and break the TV, the doors to your bedrooms are still protected so they again have to break into bedroom to steal jewellery etc)
So they break/damage/steal some stuff (since your protections failed, either all of them or only some of them) but they still need to leave with the stuff they stole and took from you
so then they have to leave the gated community by again going past gatekeeper, so if your house protection is linked with gatekeeper then gatekeeper will know to stop those thieves from leaving..
if they are stopped, yes your things are damaged, but all your stuff is still there and can be returned to you at least

In above scenario, without having a gatekeeper, it makes the job so much easier for the thieves

 

[Deleted member 178]

Like I mentioned what is the probability of a home user being DDoS or targeted by a hacker? So network attacks is practically zero here? Have your home PC being network attacked before?

DDOS aren't the only attacks... there is no reasons not to use a FW.

" what are the chance i get an car accident? practically zero? so i don't need to use my seatbelt. " indeed, until you have one then you die. good job !

 

[Azure]

I think you don't get it. I said I don't want a firewall in my system.

Can it be done using the security software in the above post #12?

No security software should ever 'uninstalled' your firewall. The least they can do is registered their own on the action center, and Windows should disable the built-on firewall. There's no point to get rid of it. You can used VS and Terra Privacy just fine.

 

[kamla5abi]

i think maybe you are confused between what firewall does and what other security software does
hopefully my above scenario makes it clear for you and others who may see this thread in the future
hopefully my analogy makes some sense and is correct too

 

[HarborFront]

you know what botnets are?
you know how many home user computers are involved in botnets?
you are right that average home user will probably not need to worry about DDoS attack, but becoming victim of other inbound attack is not impossible or so negligible that you not use built in windows firewall even

Firewall is like a gatekeeper in a gated community...see's network traffic coming in/out over network protocols (cars go in/out of gated community)
AV/etc software is like you putting locks/bars/etc on your doors, windows, and alarms/motion detectors/etc on your house (try to make it hard to break into your house, and if they do break in, try to mitigate the damage they can do by sealing off rooms from one another)

if attack from outside --> into gated community, gatekeeper will have chance to stop that
if they get past gatekeeper, then your locks/bars/alarms/etc will try to stop them from breaking into your house
if they break into your house, your security system still tries to limit the damage they can cause by sealing off rooms from one another (so they break into living room and break the TV, the doors to your bedrooms are still protected so they again have to break into bedroom to steal jewellery etc)
So they break/damage/steal some stuff (since your protections failed, either all of them or only some of them) but they still need to leave with the stuff they stole and took from you
so then they have to leave the gated community by again going past gatekeeper, so if your house protection is linked with gatekeeper then gatekeeper will know to stop those thieves from leaving..
if they are stopped, yes your things are damaged, but all your stuff is still there and can be returned to you at least

In above scenario, without having a gatekeeper, it makes the job so much easier for the thieves

So far have your PC being controlled by botnet? Can't you use a software like NoBot, Quick Heal Bot Remmoval Tool etc to scan and eradicate botnet?

No security software should ever 'uninstalled' your firewall. The least they can do is registered their own on the action center, and Windows should disable the built-on firewall. There's no point to get rid of it. You can used VS and Terra Privacy just fine.

What some meant is that installing a 3rd-party FW will disable the default Windows FW and not to uninstall it.

DDOS aren't the only attacks... there is no reasons not to use a FW.

" what are the chance i get an car accident? practically zero? so i don't need to use my seatbelt. " indeed, until you have one then you die. good job !

Can tell me what other reasons that a FW is a necessity for a home user?

 

[kamla5abi]

So far have have your PC being controlled by botnet? Can't you use a software to scan and eradicate botnet?

what is the population of users on MalwareTips?
what is the population of users in the world?
what is the total number of devices in the world connected to the internet in some way?

just because I or other members on these forums haven't had network attacks (which probably they haven't, since they are on MalwareTips, their security is probably better than most average joe lol)

 

[HarborFront]

what is the population of users on MalwareTips?
what is the population of users in the world?
what is the total number of devices in the world connected to the internet in some way?

just because I or other members on these forums haven't had network attacks (which probably they haven't, since they are on MalwareTips, their security is probably better than most average joe lol)

Of course if you want to use a FW then go ahead. NO stopping you.

My question is whether a FW is still relevant today for a home user.

 

[Deleted member 178]

So far have have your PC being controlled by botnet? Can't you use a software to scan and eradicate botnet?

Your point of view is too short, you focus only on small details.
does your router is perfectly set and doesn't have any vulnerabilities? No and it will never be.
Do your system is perfectly set and doesn't have any vulnerabilities? No and it will never be.

Based on those 2 factors , you need a FW to hamper network attacks, even if you may never encounter one.

Can tell me what other reasons that a FW is a necessity for a home user?

Just google, you have plenty.

You know that internet-facing applications have inbound/outbound connections right?
Your browsers have inbound/outbounds conections connections right?
You know that websites know your IP adress right?
You know that people making websites are no saints , right?

Should i continue?

My question is whether a FW is still relevant today for a home user.

Yes it is. if someone manage to get access in your network, you are done.

 

[HarborFront]

Your point of view is too short, you focus only on small details.
does your router is perfectly set and doesn't have any vulnerabilities? No and it will never be.
Do your system is perfectly set and doesn't have any vulnerabilities? No and it will never be.

Based on those 2 factors , you need a FW to hamper network attacks, even if you may never encounter one.


Just google, you have plenty.

you know that internet-facing applications have inbound/outbound connections right?
your browsers have inbound/outbounds conections connections right?
you know that websites may know your IP adress right?
you know that people making websites are no saints , right?

should i continue?


Yes it is. if i manage to get access in your network, you are done.

FYI, I'm a very active mobile user too so important questions regarding router/gateway in public places precede over my home use and are out of my control.

For the first two items, as a home user, our primary concerns are malware infections, phishing, scamming etc. Can the FW prevent these? Can the use of security software prevent these?

With regards to the last two items it is a matter of privacy and anonymity which the FW cannot protect against.

Like I said what is the probability of a home user being targeted by a hacker?

 

[Deleted member 178]

FYI, I'm a very active mobile user too so important questions regarding router/gateway in public places precede over my home use and are out of my control.

Your home network is same as a public one: you have an IP , you are visible, you are hackable.
in public places it is even easier because the network is shared with everybody.
I guess you don't know that hackers daily scan huge range of IP adresses hoping to find a vulnerable machine.
When i checked my router logs, i could see dozen of pings/portscans to my ip adress daily.

For the first two items, as a home user, our primary concerns are malware infections, phishing, scamming etc. Can the FW prevent these?

depend of what you consider a FW , if only the networking part, then:
malware infections: the execution? no. The "call home aspect" ? yes
Phishing/scamming? no, but it has nothing to do with computer security but user credulity, and applicable outside computing. Don't throw unrelated matters in the debate.

With regards to the last two items it is a matter of privacy and anonymity which the FW cannot protect against.

but the FW help thwart the potential attempt to penetrate your system if they are known.

Remember that once an skilled attacker get into your system, it has the tools to disable all your security softs.

People use condoms to protect from STDs , in case of ...

"In case of" is the basic notion of security. if you weren't concerned , you won't run any security softs.

Now, if you don't want a FW, just do it, that is your machine anyway, but the day you get compromised (if it happens) , don't come here and cry...

 

[roger_m]

I don't know why you would want to run your computer with no firewall. Windows Firewall is very unobtrusive, and it is very rare for it prompt you to allow anything.

I could understand, if Windows Firewall prompted every time a new program attempted an outgoing connection. In that case the alerts could get annoying, particularly if you regularly install or update software. But it doesn't, and the alerts are very occasional.

 

[HarborFront]

Your home network is same as a public one: you have an IP , you are visible, you are hackable.
in public places it is even easier because the network is shared with everybody.
I guess you don't know that hackers daily scan huge range of IP adresses hoping to find a vulnerable machine.
When i checked my router logs, i could see dozen of pings/portscans to my ip adress daily.


depend of what you consider a FW , if only the networking part, then:
malware infections: the execution? no. The "call home aspect" ? yes
Phishing/scamming? no, but it has nothing to do with computer security but user credulity, and applicable outside computing. Don't throw unrelated matters in the debate.


but the FW help thwart the potential attempt to penetrate your system if they are known.

Remember that once an skilled attacker get into your system, it has the tools to disable all your security softs.

People use condoms to protect from STDs , in case of ...

"In case of" is the basic notion of security. if you weren't concerned , you won't run any security softs.

Now, if you don't want a FW, just do it, that is your machine anyway, but the day you get compromised (if it happens) , don't come here and cry...

Can a VPN with multi-hops and/or Tor prevent your IP exposure?

Can calling home be prevented using Terra Privacy?

How often is a home user being hacked?

 

[HarborFront]

I don't know why you would want to run your computer with no firewall. Windows Firewall is very unobtrusive, and it is very rare for it prompt you to allow anything.

I could understand, if Windows Firewall prompted every time a new program attempted an outgoing connection. In that case the alerts could get annoying, particularly if you regularly install or update software. But it doesn't, and the alerts are very occasional.

Nothing. Just another way of looking at things. It's just like going the sig-less way of not using an AV with signatures which I believe you can accept that.

 

[_CyberGhosT_]

Of course if you want to use a FW then go ahead. NO stopping you.

My question is whether a FW is still relevant today for a home user.

My answer to you brother would be, "not there yet" but the firewall "as we know it" is going to change, the model we use now is
dated, although functional and handy to have, I think one could get by without using one. Today there is software available that would
remedy most of the risk for the "Home User".
I think we are just on the early tip of this "change" that's going to happen to the firewall. I see your points and you seem knowledgeable
so don't drink the cool-aid. The better you understand your system, the easier it is to replace or circumvent some aspects of it.
If I had no firewall I would run Terra Privacy and HMP.A, to me that sounds pretty solid.

 

[HarborFront]

My answer to you brother would be, "not there yet" but the firewall "as we know it" is going to change, the model we use now is
dated, although functional and handy to have, I think one could get by without using one. Today there is software available that would
remedy most of the risk for the "Home User".
I think we are just on the early tip of this "change" that's going to happen to the firewall. I see your points and you seem knowledgeable
so don't drink the cool-aid. The better you understand your system, the easier it is to replace or circumvent some aspects of it.
If I had no firewall I would run Terra Privacy and HMP.A, to me that sounds pretty solid.

I'm actually presenting another point of view in having a security system without the need of a FW just like going the sig-less way which is difficult to be accepted by some.

Noticed my post #12 which mentioned security software but NOT an AV? This is another aspect which I'm pursuing. My ultimate aim is to have a security system WITHOUT an AV and a FW. Of course the right software have to be chosen to do that.

 

[shmu26]

Windows firewall can be disabled without negatively affecting the OS as a whole, as long as you do not disable the WF service. Because there are certain other Windows processes, such as Windows update, that reportedly are linked to WF service, so you mess things up if the service is not running. This issue was discussed on Comodo threads.

Generally speaking, I am sort of unexcited about firewall protection, because advanced malware can piggyback on legitimate processes in order to connect out, and you will never know, unless you are extremely knowledgeable and constantly monitoring your firewall.

 

[Deleted member 178]

I'm actually presenting another point of view in having a security system without the need of a FW just like going the sig-less way which is difficult to be accepted by some.

You can't compare them, unless you never go online and hence you have no network, you need a FW.

Noticed my post #12 which mentioned security software but NOT an AV? This is another aspect which I'm pursuing. My ultimate aim is to have a security system WITHOUT an AV and a FW. Of course the right software have to be chosen to do that.

There is no (and will never have ) replacement to a FW, every machine on the planet is behind a FW (software or hardware) , so this logic of FW-less is just fantasy.
How would you monitor (allow/block) inbound/outbound monitor connections without a FW? by calling Harry Potter?

Users like me goes "Sig-less" because we don't want a RT engine eating resources and a 300+mb database dropped on the HDD.
I go sig-less because i have other security mechanism to prevent infection on my system in a far better way.
There is no other networking mechanism to replicate the role of a FW. They may have other nomination but they are still FWs.

FW monitor programs, filter traffic, allow/deny any connections to specified IPs, monitors protocols, etc...
No other softs can do that. If it exist i would use it already.
Unwanted outbound connections attempts can be stopped by non-FW security softs. For example ReHIPS deny isolated program to connect internet but nothing more.
Unwanted inbound traffic only by software or hardware FWs.

If I had no firewall I would run Terra Privacy and HMP.A, to me that sounds pretty solid.

As if both of them monitor inbound traffic... seriously...

Don't you think if FWs were useless, why every OS vendors (MS, Linux, Apple) would waste their time to make one for their OSes?
More and more i see people on forums having fantasist ideas without having a clue of what they are implying, just because they find a new piece of software pretending to do the impossible...

 

[Deleted member 178]

Windows firewall can be disabled without negatively affecting the OS as a whole, as long as you do not disable the WF service. Because there are certain other Windows processes, such as Windows update, that reportedly are linked to WF service, so you mess things up if the service is not running. This issue was discussed on Comodo threads.

disabling WinFW to replace it by another is one thing , going without any FW at all is another.

Generally speaking, I am sort of unexcited about firewall protection, because advanced malware can piggyback on legitimate processes in order to connect out, and you will never know, unless you are extremely knowledgeable and constantly monitoring your firewall.

You people only think about outbound connections, as if inbound attacks are inexistant...FW were made because inbound attacks were the first thing hackers learnt to do , it was the primary computer attacks .