Firewall vs. Anti-virus

[Opto]

Before my last little disaster I had been running w2k sp4, ie6 sp1 without any problems. I use Zone Alarm Pro as my firewall, and I would periodically run Spybot and Ad Aware (updating definitions of course). And once in a while I’d run House Call. The reports always came back clean.

In talking with online friends whom I consider knowledgeable about computer stuff I drew the conclusion that using an AV program was a waste. It slows down you system, and tells you you’ve got a virus AFTER you get the virus. The firewall keeps it out in the firs place. My systems are generally old and slow, so speed is a consideration for me, and so far I haven’t had any problems running without an AV.

This is how I have been operating for the past couple of years. I’d appreciate any comments you have about firewall vs. anti-virus.

[Sir Radfordin]

A firewall won't stop a virus coming into your system via an email attachment. I'd have said people who feel happy with the one or the other approach tend to insist on Anti Virus software before a firewall.

I've got ZA Pro on several systems and virus infected emails still get though to me but NAV sorts them out.

It is generally considered "madness" to run a computer without Anti-virus software installed and fully up to date.

[mark2]

Personally I wouldn't be without the A/V, some of the free ones have very little impact on your resources, when compared with Norton or Mcafee (sp ? )

I currently use avast but also AVG is highly recommended.

I disagree withyour statement about a firewall keeping viruses out, you're far more likely to invite a virus in using a program that you allow past the firewall anyway.

A lot of the most recent viruses are email borne or come via p2p downloads.

The firewall proves it's worth by telling you of programs trying to access the net such as trojans, but it simply alerts you that you have been caught !

[Agent Smith]

Opto, I'm sorry but I have to disagree with your thoughts on this matter. A firewall will NOT keep out most viruses. A firewall, to put it very simply, will only monitor your pc's external connections (be it to the internet or a lan) and apply a set of rules, usually preconfigured in home software firewalls, to the incoming and outgoing traffic. It does not scan the traffic for it's content.

This is where an Anti Virus package comes in. The AV WILL scan (as long as it is configured correctly) the traffic, and as long as it is kept upto date with the vendors av definitions, should then be able to deal with the problems.

Do not confuse the fact that because an AV program reports that it has "caught" an infection, that your "pc" has caught the infection. As long as the AV software does it's job correctly, it will quarantine the incoming infection before it can deliver it's payload. Another issue a lot of people seem to have, is that when an AV program detects an infection, it will often go on to say that it cannot delete the file. Usually this is because it has already dealt with the problem and the file is no longer there to be deleted. However, this can cause some alarm to the end user.

Admittedly an AV package will use some overhead on your pc, but unless you are into some really intensive applications, I doubt very much that you will notice any difference in normal operation. At the end of the day, it is a trade off between overhead and security. I know which one I would go for every time!!

In todays modern world of "always on fast internet connections", I think that to not have a working AV package on your computer is really tempting fate, and to be frank and honest, rather foolish.

Mr. M.

[Opto]

O.K. I've already owned up to being a fool, and am trying to correct the situation, but in an informed way.

Perhaps it's my computer usage that has kept me safe. I generally don't download email; and if I do it is some joke sent by a friend that I copy/paste. My account is with Yahoo and it scans anything I might want to download. (I hope I’m not wrong in trusting Yahoo.) I NEVER open attachments from unknown sources, and known sources get scanned before opening.

I use the net to post on a few message boards, for Googling. No ‘Outlook’ or instant messaging. My demands are very low. I do word processing, mostly for my posts (like this one). Sometimes I’ll tweak a photo and put it on my website to link it to a message board. I’m not much of a ‘power user’. And this may be what has kept me safe.

When I look at my ZA log I see a lot of activity. At least once a minute, often every few seconds, something is getting blocked. Is this just harmless stuff I shouldn’t worry about? If not viruses or tracking cookies what is a firewall preventing from getting in? If the firewall blocks certain traffic, isn’t this in effect blocking incoming viruses?

[Besty]

I thought firewalls blocked hackers

[Sir Radfordin]

Besty - yes a firewall can stop a hacker (they all have flaws though) but 99% of home users will never be hacked, at least not intentionally.

Opto, you are fairly safe if you only use webmail and Yahoo are fairly good with their scanning. Most of the stuff in ZA will be harmless goings and comings - a large percentage of the log will be to do with legitimate traffic or things that can be stopped but you don't have any ill effects if you don't.

You could continue to get away without AV software - but thats a risk you have to decide if you want to take it.

[Guest ellas]

just look at this post and then you will realise avs are a must http://www.windowsforum.org/forum/index.ph...t=0entry84034

[nellie2]

What it doesn't say in the link, is that those who were testing this link this afternoon and who got redirected, their AV kicked in and and started screaming about trojans etc.