PC Firewalls

Windows firewall provides basic protection

If you use Windows Vista or Windows 7, you are somewhat protected by their included firewalls, but reviews say you will be safer with a third-party firewall. Windows Vista includes some protection against outbound threats, though that is limited compared to what's found in better third party programs. Windows 7's firewall brings a few incremental improvements to the one in Vista, though experts say it's not a major step forward.

The big complaint regarding the Vista firewall is that outbound security is limited by default and that turning on better protection could be difficult. Experts say it is better than having no firewall at all, but most free and paid third-party firewalls are more effective. The firewall included with Windows 7 doesn't draw many more compliments. PCMag.com's Neil J. Rubenking likes some of the incremental improvements, such as new network settings. But he expresses frustration that a two-way firewall, which controls which programs can access the Internet, is still lacking. "I hope that by the time Windows 8 comes around," Rubenking quips, "Microsoft will at least match the feature set of 10-year-old ZoneAlarm," which pioneered such features. Considering that you can get a better firewall for free, Microsoft's operating system firewall seems to offer only limited value.

Best software firewalls for Windows users

Although standalone firewalls continue to exist, more are being interwoven within Internet security suites -- and that's especially true of free products. While the benefits of that approach are clear -- for one thing, when all of your Internet security components come from the same vendor, it's more likely that all will work together in relative harmony -- there are also some downsides. The biggest one is that no single security suite will do all things equally well. Those with the most robust antivirus or anti-spyware features might have only so-so firewalls, or vice versa.

Comodo Internet Security draws some terrific compliments -- at least for its firewall component. Though you can get the firewall as a free, standalone product (Comodo Firewall), most reviewers look to the free Comodo Internet Security suite, which adds antivirus, anti-spyware and other protections. Paid versions of the suite -- Comodo Internet Security Plus 2011 (*Est. $40) and Comodo Internet Security Pro 2011 (*Est. $50 per year) -- are also available, and those add other features and support options.

Among the experts, Matousec.com has put the current version of Internet Security Suite through its paces with a look toward firewall performance. Impressively, it's the only firewall to garner a perfect score, though several other firewalls do nearly as well.

Other professional reviewers concur that the firewall is, indeed, very effective, but not all say they like other aspects of the Comodo Internet Security suite. Writing for PC World, Preston Gralla looks at the previous version. His conclusions are neatly summed up in the title of the review: "Comodo Firewall Is a Superb Security Program (If You Ignore Its Bundled Software)." Gralla says that once the "annoying" installation, which requires users to slog through a number of pop-ups and confusing options, is complete, Comodo's firewall works great. Neil J. Rubenking at PCMag.com also looks at the previous version and comes to a similar conclusion. The firewall is "good," but he calls other parts of the suite either ineffective or overly obtrusive.

However, complaints about Comodo Internet Security's nonfirewall components are far from universal. In a fairly detailed head-to-head comparison, TheTechHerald.com pits Comodo Internet Security against Norton Internet Security 2011. As noted in our report on Internet Security Suites, Norton Internet Security 2011 draws more professional praise than any other all-in-one Internet security solution. Reviewer Steve Ragan says that when considering the whole package, including the complete removal of threats and application monitoring, Norton gets the edge for its better ability to clean up malware after the fact, but it is close. He adds that both programs are "robust" and "there is no question that they have what it takes to protect a user's system."

User reviews of Comodo Internet Security are generally positive at sites like FileForum.com and SnapFiles.com. The program also has finished atop user surveys conducted by Download.com and About.com (Note: ConsumerSearch is owned by About.com, but the two don't share an editorial affiliation).

Finally, as noted earlier, if you'd just rather turn to Comodo for its firewall and leave the rest of your security concerns to other software, the Comodo Firewall can be downloaded and installed separately, or you can choose to download Comodo Internet Security and only install the firewall component.

Agnitum Outpost's firewall also draws some good feedback. The latest version is available as a paid standalone product, Outpost Firewall Pro (*Est. $40 per year); as part of a paid security suite, Outpost Security Suite Pro (*Est. $50); or as part of Outpost Security Suite Free. Regardless of how it's packaged, however, reports say that the firewall provides excellent protection. Outpost Security Suite Pro and Outpost Security Suite Free score identically in tests at Matousec.com, near the top of the rankings and just a few percentage points behind the firewall included in Comodo Internet Security. Differences between the two suites lie in some features unrelated to the firewall, and in customer and technical support.

Other reports are good but not glowing. Web User gives a brief evaluation of the latest version of Outpost Security Suite Pro and finds that the firewall, a past winner of the site's Gold Award, remains excellent. The magazine's Andy Shaw calls it, "One of the best firewalls around." However, while Shaw says that the software does a good job of protecting your computer from "the worst of the Internet," he complains that it's lacking some common features and its user interface can be a challenge. He also complains about frequent "questions it ought to know the answers to." Perhaps that blend of power and clunkiness is behind the mixed user impressions we see. For example, feedback at Download.com varies widely; many users praise the free and pro versions of the Outpost security suite, but a significant minority also give them the lowest 1-star rating.

Online Armor has rated well with reviewers in the past, but the current version has received only limited feedback. It's not among the firewalls rated at Matousec.com at last look, and the most detailed expert reviews have become too dated to be useful. It does receive coverage in a recently updated article in Gizmo's Freeware Reviews, where it ranks second to Comodo Internet Security.

Like much other security software, Online Armor is available in a free version (Online Armor Free) and in paid versions -- Online Armor Premium (*Est. $40 for one year) and Online Armor ++ (*Est. $60 for one year). The most basic version is the least full featured and comes with no support -- not even a built-in help file according to Gizmo's Freeware Reviews. The highest-end version, Online Armor ++ adds antivirus and anti-malware features, but it falls short of qualifying as a full security suite. Gizmo's Freeware Reviews gives Online Armor Free the same rating as Comodo Internet Security, but it dings the software for its limited support and lack of automatic updates.

Check Point's ZoneAlarm is notable as one of the oldest and best-known firewalls around. Unfortunately, ZoneAlarm's reputation has fallen in recent years, and the firewall included in ZoneAlarm Extreme Security (*Est. $40) provides mediocre performance in testing at Matousec.com and Not Recommended status there.

At the same time, however, Neil J. Rubenking at PCMag.com gives ZoneAlarm Free Firewall a spin and finds enough to like to award it the site's Editors' Choice award. Still, there are some negatives. The site check feature does not prove to be especially effective, catching and blocking less that 40 percent of Rubenking's collection of malware laden websites. Protection against other attacks seems to be more robust. Usability is somewhat impaired by a toolbar that's cluttered with features not available in the free ZoneAlarm firewall, and a Google search tool that seems more biased toward paid than actual search results when compared to a normal Google search.

A brief editorial review at Download.com praises ZoneAlarm, but users give the free and paid versions of the firewall and security suites lower average ratings. Some say the software doesn't make a difference, while others report crashes, system bloat and conflicts with Windows.

In most professional reviews, Norton Internet Security 2011 (*Est. $70) finishes at the top of the heap when it comes to the best overall protection against all types of Internet threats. However, we've seen some contradictory reports regarding the effectiveness of its firewall. It flops in the latest tests at Matousec.com, with an effectiveness of 40 percent and a rating of "very poor." PCMag.com, however, conducts its own firewall testing and paints a much better picture. Rubenking calls Norton's firewall tough, effective and "totally tamper-proof." Rubenking's testing indicates that Norton Internet Security reacts only to tests carrying malicious code, but it isn't clear whether this might be the reason the programs fared so poorly on the Matousec tests. Rubenking says that firewall effectiveness extends to Norton 360, which provides the effectiveness of Norton Internet Security 2011 but with "a friendlier face." Both suites earn Editors' Choice awards from the site. For more information about Norton Internet Security 2011, see the separate ConsumerSearch report on Internet security software.

Norton Internet Security 2011 edges out Kaspersky Internet Security 2011 (*Est. $80) in most reviews -- though most also say the margin of victory is not that large. One place where Kaspersky might have an edge is in its firewall. Matousec.com puts Kaspersky to the test, and it does relatively well -- passing about 92 percent of the challenges put to it. That's enough to earn a rating of excellent from that site.

PCMag.com is among those that pay prime attention to firewall performance when evaluating security suites. Rubenking finds some issues with anti-malware performance -- saying that it didn't live up to the lofty results from independent tests in his trials. However, he has no qualms about the built-in firewall. Kaspersky successfully fended off all of Rubenking's challenges, including attempts to take it down, as might happen during an Internet attack, and keeping users informed of important events, such as a website-based attack, without bugging them to death with queries over every minor software access request. Again, more information about the other strengths and weaknesses of Kaspersky Internet Security 2011 can be found in our Internet security software report.