Re: Most Popular Hardware Firewalls?

Leythos wrote:
> galt_57@hotmail.com says...
> > Leythos wrote:
> > > galt_57@hotmail.com says...
> > > > Are they all the same?
> > >
> > > No. Vast differences at all levels.
> >
> > So what is a good one and a less good one? Thanks.
>
> Anything that says NAT ROUTER, generally anything under $250, is
> considered a fake firewall, it's just marketing hype for NAT methods.
> NAT is a ROUTING technology, not a firewall technology.
>
> Anything that has a Certification as a Firewall is most likely a
> firewall that can protect you.
>
> Most of the cheap, sub $250 units are just NAT routers with some fancy
> gimics or fancy routing features.
>
> While a NAT Router is NOT a firewall, it's the minimum that you would
> want to have between you and the Internet. I know many people that have
> been protected by them for years of always-on service and never
> experienced any malware - but they also used many other methods to stay
> safe.
>
> With a true firewall, like many of the better units, one can setup rules
> to prevent malware of entering your network, even when you are browsing
> the web or fetching email - they can remove ActiveX, remove content,
> block downloading of files by type, remove bad headers in SMTP sessions,
> remove file attachments based on mime-type, etc.... While those are not
> actually firewall functions, they are often found in the better firewall
> units.
>
> I like, actually will use over any other vendor if I have a choice,
> WatchGuard, but I also use units from the other major vendors.

I wouldn't think that $250 firewalls are going to be commonly found in
home networking. Is the $250 unit distinguished by the "stateful"
approach? Do you think the "stateful" features of a sub $100
firewall-router are much less effective?
Received on Mon May 1 00:53:03 2006