Solved

Spyware doctor

Posted on 2006-06-23
10
708 Views
Last Modified: 2013-11-16
I recently purchased Spyware doctor and installed it in my desktop computer, being a Pentium 3, 500, with XP home & service pack 2. Should I have Zone alarm as well, installed? Not sure if Spyware doctor acts as a firewall.
0
Comment
Question by:Ed00707
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2
  • +3
10 Comments
 
LVL 10

Accepted Solution

by:
mcrossland earned 100 total points
ID: 16974024
Hello Ed00707,
XP Home with SP2 has a firewall that works quite well.  Check in your control panel and make sure it is turned on and with no exceptions.  Can't get tighter than that as far as outside attempts coming in.  You still need to be careful about surfing sites and the process is initiated by you.  Personally I don't use zone alarm.  It is an irritant to me becuase it constantly asks you what you want to allow.  Just block it all with windows xp firewall.  :)

Have a good one!
Mike
0
 
LVL 32

Expert Comment

by:r-k
ID: 16974098
Just to conform the point - Spyware Doctor does not act as a Firewall, so you need that separately.

You can use the free firewall that is included with XP SP2 as recommended by Mike above. I like it myself.
If you have a router (such as Linksys) that connects you to the Internet, then there is very likely a firewall in that also.

In each of the above two cases you need to make sure the firewall is enabled, i.e. turned on.

ZoneAlarm has some advantages but also can be annoying.
0
 
LVL 97

Expert Comment

by:war1
ID: 16975424
Greetings, Ed00707 !

>> Should I have Zone alarm as well, installed?

You need a firewall besides Spyware Doctor. An advantage Zone Alarm has is that it checks traffic both incoming to your computer and outgoing from your computer.  So a program or virus is sending a message from your computer to the Internet, you will not know with Windows XP Firewall.

Zone Alarm is trying to be all things to all people.  It has antivirus as well as a firewall and thus is a resource hog.  If you have Zone Alarm before and it does not interfere with other programs, use it.  I am using version 6.1.744, and it is working fine in my computer.  A new version of ZA is available, 6.5.x, which many users have trouble installing or using.

Kerio is a better choice for a software firewall that monitors traffic both ways and uses low resources.
http://www.sunbelt-software.com/Kerio.cfm


Best wishes!
0
PRTG Network Monitor: Intuitive Network Monitoring

Network Monitoring is essential to ensure that computer systems and network devices are running. Use PRTG to monitor LANs, servers, websites, applications and devices, bandwidth, virtual environments, remote systems, IoT, and many more. PRTG is easy to set up & use.

 
LVL 38

Expert Comment

by:Rich Rumble
ID: 16975512
Turn on a firewall of your choice, get an alternate browser, begin using best practices, and try to get your money back on the spyware remover:
http://xinn.org/win_bestpractices.html
http://www.xinn.org/annoyance_spy-ware.html
http://blogs.msdn.com/aaron_margosis/archive/2006/06/02/614226.aspx
This is also how M$ is solving the spyware problem in Vista
http://www.matasano.com/log/332/matasano-interviews-ie-lead-pm-christopher-vaughan
-rich
0
 
LVL 4

Expert Comment

by:ale_jrb
ID: 16978876
The free version of ZA is only the firewall, and thus is less of a resource hogger than the more full versions. In my opinion, you can never have too much security - I run ZA Security Suite (which has the firewall) as well as the Windows firewall and never have any problem - I would advise getting both.

And there are lots of good any spyware programs that you do not have to pay for, such as Spybot Search and Destroy and Ad-Aware personal - both are free and work fine, so if you can get your money back on the Spyware Doctor, I would do so.

Hope this helps!
0
 
LVL 38

Expert Comment

by:Rich Rumble
ID: 16979947
Two firewalls is inviting trouble, your've got two similar apps, fighting over the same packets/data. and BSOD's can and do result. ZA, free or pay, has an added feature over XP's, it's at much better at application security, controlling access the NIC, and for services. Security is a process, not a product. Your better served using best practices, and a single firewall. XP's is stateful and sufficient at keeping the bad guys out. ZA is a step up as it can control access from the PC to the outside, in additon to the oute into the pc. Two firewalls can cause overlap, while one might want to block this or that, the other must be configured exactly to be sure that the packets don't get allowed when they shouldn't.
-rich
0
 
LVL 97

Expert Comment

by:war1
ID: 16994686
Ed,

We have not heard from you. Did any comment help you solve your problem? Do you have any more question? If an Expert helped you, please accept his/her answer above with an excellent or good grade.

Thanks, war1
0
 
LVL 4

Expert Comment

by:ale_jrb
ID: 16994734
richrumble,

Of course, as with Norton, ZA can be safely fun with the Windows firewall as it is designed to be compatible. ZA and Norton may not like each other, for example, but Windows firewall and either ZA or Norton work together. It is for this reason that I can (and do) run them safely together.

And yes, please respond Ed00707.

-Ale_Jrb-
0
 
LVL 38

Expert Comment

by:Rich Rumble
ID: 16995793
Still, it's possible for one firewall to pass on packets that the other is set to drop those same packets, depends on which one "see's" them first, and it's not always windows firewall. To me you should use one software firewall alone, to keep overlap (or "underlap" for that matter) from occuring, and to help keep your administration to a minimum. Most personal firewalls are equal with regurd to keeping you stealth to outsides, no firewall really outshines another at packet dropping, it's the other features that really differentiate them. ZA has it's access control of the NIC, and M$'s does hardly anything of the sort that isn't easily by-passable. ZA Pro add's the ability to allow or deny based on specific ports, while the free client from ZA offers you some default preset ports it can allow/deny. XP SP2 has the ability to allow or deny ports built-in as well.

So to me as an admin, if all I need is packet's dropped, I may stick to XP's FW, if I'd like more control over outbound access as well, I'll turn off Xp's FW and use ZA's alone.
-rich
0
 

Author Comment

by:Ed00707
ID: 17028937
I wish to thank you all for your response.
0

Featured Post

U.S. Department of Agriculture and Acronis Access

With the new era of mobile computing, smartphones and tablets, wireless communications and cloud services, the USDA sought to take advantage of a mobilized workforce and the blurring lines between personal and corporate computing resources.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

Most MSPs worth their salt are already offering cybersecurity to their customers. But cybersecurity as a service is wide encompassing and can mean many things.  So where are MSPs falling in this spectrum?
Many businesses neglect disaster recovery and treat it as an after-thought. I can tell you first hand that data will be lost, hard drives die, servers will be hacked, and careless (or malicious) employees can ruin your data.
Email security requires an ever evolving service that stays up to date with counter-evolving threats. The Email Laundry perform Research and Development to ensure their email security service evolves faster than cyber criminals. We apply our Threat…
The Email Laundry PDF encryption service allows companies to send confidential encrypted  emails to anybody. The PDF document can also contain attachments that are embedded in the encrypted PDF. The password is randomly generated by The Email Laundr…

839 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question