[ifhope]

as far as antivirus is concern... there is no concern

regarding firwall top one which is like most but a P-II machine recommended. It is MNF from Mandrake... which has great look as well as no need for plugin or addons...

if u don't have high processing machine... then use IPCop... and remember Addons are necessary...

[starsky32]

I use LOOK'N'STOP Firewall (windows version), very good, low cost and low ressource needed.
MacAffe VirusScan as an antivirus, as i found it seems to be more difficult to make trojans or virii 'undetectable' for him.

[dstevens1958]

Dillinja, on Aug 16 2003, 07:47 PM, said:

Good old IPtables, and "firestarter" firewall...great to see all those DCOM probes while I sit back and laugh in my Linux castle!  :D AV? Pfffttttttttttttt!!  :lol:

I agree with this. I use iptables behind a router with a NAT firewall and updated firmware. I feel pretty safe as I haven't detected an attack inside that router since I set it up over a year ago now. Even if someone gets through it, I still have my trusty iptables and SuSE Firewall2. As for AV, I feel pretty safe again, but just to be sure I use chkrootkit and F-Prot AV for Linux.

Um, on the other machine running WindozeME I use NIS 2003. Only thing I don't like is it eats up a lot of overhead. I prefer using Sygate personal for a firewall and I think its av-personal as antivirus on windows. These programs are small and fast, and don't use much overhead and allow more memory for multitasking! :) I put them on my sisters Win2k box and it works really well too. But I still like my iptables! ;)

Just my cheap two cents. (Canadian currency and all... lol)

Dave

[starsky32]

Yeah, I aggree with you wicked, but i have not the same conclusion.
- Control & Monitor both IN Traffic and OUT Traffic
- ability to Set up Rulesfor Applications/Networks
- surf the Web Stealthly
- be warned when-ever a potential intruder try's to get into my system
- ability to block all internet Traffic and provide me with a detailed log of all attempts for future Hunting.
For all you said, Look'N'Stop seems to be better than Za.
I admit that maybe it seems not too easy to configure, but it's just an impression : in fact it's so simple you'lle be surprised.

Ok, Za is correct, but take look at this page:
http://www.pcflank.com/art41c.htm

Look'n'stop very light , effective and allows good fine-tuning.
Give it a try ;-)
(i'm NO member of the looknstop team -lol- , just like very much this product ;-) )

[Chris.ology]

AV = NOD32 That is the best AV I have used. Norton takes up far too much memory and CPU cycles for a 2003-grade software package and it does not always detect virii, certainly not as well as Nod32!

[tibbar]

anyone who uses Norton AV should be aware that any kiddie can make an undetectable trojan for it with relative ease. Mcaffe is a much stronger AV and in my experience tends to get updated more quickly to new hostile code.

RAV is the best, but...M$ now own it for inclusion in Longhorn.

I guess what im saying is that using Norton is a quick way to get owned.

Personally, I dont rely on Firewalls, and prefer using a router with just the bare min ports forwarded. Its never been penetrated so far...

And to protect from undetectable trojans, always run tcpview in the background, and have a quick peek now and then to see if any unusual progs are connecting to unknown ip's.

[net]

i'm using the built in NAT firewall of my smc barricade :)

sometimes scannin' my sys with norton antivir.

greetz

[FakoLy]

i am using AntiVirusKit professional 11 (for me, the best you can find. It uses kaspersky and KAV scanner for virus detection)
firewall i have BlackIce :)

[PaRaDiSo]

Hmmmm, well after i had some problems with Tiny and Windows XP i just turned to good old Zonealarm Pro and for Antivirus I use NOD32...very little overhead, works great!!! (Tiny used to leave ports 1025-1026-1027 in a not stealthed state!)

[8XyuVmUB]

:ph34r: Blackice and Symantec