someone Posted September 15, 2009 Share Posted September 15, 2009 Hi guys! Some time ago i'm playing a bit and see this proxy at softpedia. I tried it but i'm not sure if is good.... the page looks like a Rogue app.... but the features that is pesented is very good if is true: It can filter alot of stuff like headers, cookies, ADs, porn, and some others stuff and you can enable some Av engines to scan the traffic, like KAV, avast, Fprot and clamAV. Its free for home use and have linux/windows versions. Anyone know something about? its a rogue app?http://www.safesquid.com/http://www.softpedia.com/get/Internet/Servers/WEB-Servers/SafeSquid.shtmlTHX in advance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator DKT27 Posted September 15, 2009 Administrator Share Posted September 15, 2009 Well it looks OK. See there is an article on wikipedia if you have any doubts. Go here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SafeSquid ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shought Posted September 15, 2009 Share Posted September 15, 2009 It does look like a genuine application, it's certainly not some kind of rogueware ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HX1 Posted September 15, 2009 Share Posted September 15, 2009 For about two seconds I thought this had something to do with SquidCache..You know I see a lot of firewalls that work for HTTP.. but what about other protocols and RAW data? Has anyone discovered an efficient Firewall for that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
someone Posted September 15, 2009 Author Share Posted September 15, 2009 Uhn OK thx for confirm... i'm thinkin in use it mainly because of the web scan - will eradicate the need to install a realtime AV, and the engines are good - the other stuff i block in the Outpost WebFilter... only not found what engines version is... if is much old.... but not sure.... i'm always a little dubious in redirect the traffic through a proxy... you never know if the trafiic can be logged... if something can be intercepted and stuff like that... Thx and congratulations for the very good forum! Awesome work and friendly communit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HX1 Posted September 15, 2009 Share Posted September 15, 2009 What are you planning to do? Compile from source for Windows? Because the only download I found at the site was for Linux..or is that what you have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizarre™ Posted September 15, 2009 Share Posted September 15, 2009 This reminds me of Foxy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator DKT27 Posted September 15, 2009 Administrator Share Posted September 15, 2009 @Bizarre: Great program. First time I'm seein it. It's bad that I don't wanna filter my Internet, atleast from por*:unsure: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizarre™ Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 Foxy is highly customizable.If you don't want to filter something, you can easily configure it not to.I used it before, but not anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
someone Posted September 16, 2009 Author Share Posted September 16, 2009 Safesquid have a windows version, the 3x (the linux is verion 4x) : http://www.safesquid.com/html/portal.php?page=126 the first is for linux and the second under it is for windows.direct link: http://downloads.safesquid.net/win32/personal/setup_safesquid_Personal_3.1.2.exeIt's similar to foxy. Looks like the only difference is safe squid have the the virus scanning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator DKT27 Posted September 16, 2009 Administrator Share Posted September 16, 2009 Well you are right. Windows version does exists. How did I missed to see that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizarre™ Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 I skip the virus scanning part.Nod32 is doing it already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HX1 Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 I don't know you would think they would have that on the downloads page.. Odd ... the thing just tripped ESS.. said it was a Win32/Statik Trojan..:blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizarre™ Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 It seems to be a false positive: Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
someone Posted September 16, 2009 Author Share Posted September 16, 2009 my experience with nod is not that good.... tried it with V2 and after with the V3 and the 2 times i got infected.... but i'm thinking in add it back for realtime ... is the unique that the web shield feature not work in a proxy way..... leaving a open port.... Kaspersky do this... and i read Avira too... never used Avast.... but looks like with V5 Avast will leave the "mid" pack and go to the top with the others (i hope so)..... but i need see how the web shield work . if Nod or avast not work for this so i will try add safesquid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HX1 Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 I dunno I disabled the 'Scan when done downloading' feature is FF3 yesterday, I don't know if it was my download manager of the number of connections I had to the server but I tried to download another Firewall today too.. and ESS said that it blocked over 67 attacks from the one file..32 in the first five secs after un-quarantining it.. and the rest later on sitting on my external...wrapped it up real nice and snug with its little predator icon..Was about to Erase it.. don't knowI think it would be a good idea though..LOL.. I mean it was enough to cut connections too..Then this one was like 'pfffftuha' ..LOL But I have gotten that before from valid programs.. then they will issue an update later on that no longer has the issue.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizarre™ Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 ESS suck because of its firewall.Follow the link from my post: Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
someone Posted September 16, 2009 Author Share Posted September 16, 2009 I not see Matousec tests how font of informations for choose a firewall... Matousec is about HIPS not Firewalls... the HIPS part of ESS sucks maybe... but the firewall is not tested... how it can stealth you.... how it behave in a DOS attack, how it do if a great amount of traffic is used like when using p2p.... if in this situations the firewall increase the consume of CPU/RAM resources, if have freezes... and stuff like this... is not work of the firewall protect againts driver load, direct disk access, process memory injection and the others things is tested... Firewall is for protect againt network attacks, for stealth you and to control IN/OUT traffic.... some of the options like DSN API request, low level network access and protect the HOST and registry keys which have something with the network configs i leave enabled in the Outpost HIPS and think is valid... the others is not work of the Firewall take care. A Firewall can have HIPS, a HIPS can have network monitor, but Firewall is firewall and HIPS is HIPS... i think is not right matousec say Firewall X is not recommended and Y is the best for test the HIPS part.... at least the new proactive test name work better and distinguish what is tested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator DKT27 Posted September 16, 2009 Administrator Share Posted September 16, 2009 Just for keeps. ESET SS or ESET Nod32 doesn't have HIPS protection. ESET Firewall really sucks. Without firewall it is the greatest. As far as Comodo firewall is concerned, it has a DoS protection and HIPS. It doesn't crash on my old and slow PC, no matter if I play high end games to downloadin torrents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
someone Posted September 16, 2009 Author Share Posted September 16, 2009 The application modification detection is some sort of HIPS not is? and if ESS really not have a HIPS module why matousec tested it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator DKT27 Posted September 16, 2009 Administrator Share Posted September 16, 2009 Yes you are right about HIPS. But if ESET has HIPS. Even after usin and doin experiments on it for more than 1 year. How couldn't I find it? :think:EDIT: ESET change log does say HIPS. But I still cannot see it on my PC. Here is the change log - http://www.eset.eu/support/changelog-eset-nod32-antivirus-4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
someone Posted September 16, 2009 Author Share Posted September 16, 2009 The ESET Smart Security have the feature. The AV not have. Think it is present only in the ESS because it can make a better work alongside with the IDS and the firewall. The AVs ( not internet security) i know that have or is in beta test version with HIPS/Behavior Blocker is KAV, Avira and Avast. The one in KAV i think is a good addition but i wish the application control can be in the AV too. The ESS Option for the application modification detection is under the advanced setup tree near the firewall options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizarre™ Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 I not see Matousec tests how font of informations for choose a firewall... Matousec is about HIPS not Firewalls... the HIPS part of ESS sucks maybe... but the firewall is not tested... how it can stealth you.... how it behave in a DOS attack, how it do if a great amount of traffic is used like when using p2p.... if in this situations the firewall increase the consume of CPU/RAM resources, if have freezes... and stuff like this... is not work of the firewall protect againts driver load, direct disk access, process memory injection and the others things is tested... Firewall is for protect againt network attacks, for stealth you and to control IN/OUT traffic.... some of the options like DSN API request, low level network access and protect the HOST and registry keys which have something with the network configs i leave enabled in the Outpost HIPS and think is valid... the others is not work of the Firewall take care. A Firewall can have HIPS, a HIPS can have network monitor, but Firewall is firewall and HIPS is HIPS... i think is not right matousec say Firewall X is not recommended and Y is the best for test the HIPS part.... at least the new proactive test name work better and distinguish what is tested.They say a picture is worth a thousand words.I guess they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HX1 Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 Yeah ESS has those features, you don't get to control it so precisely..and there is not a screen to really alter a whole lot but .. funny thing is my Router has them too.. so I am setting behind two levels of it..LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
someone Posted September 17, 2009 Author Share Posted September 17, 2009 @ Bizarre™I think i not make my point right (my english is very bad )I'm not saying Comodo is a bad app. I used it for some months and like it a lot - if the V4 come with all promised features and the AV improve will be a wonderfull Internet security - and for free. This is good for users and for the security app market because the paid ones will need improve to not lose clients.What i'm saying is: Matousec test the HIPS part... if 5 of the tests really have something to do with the firewall part is much. So a firewall test that not test the firewall part? strange not is? If is a Firewall test why Mamutu ( a behaviour block without outbond control if i remember right) are doing in the test? Because of this i say Matousec is not a right place to see informations about firewall. Now with the new name is different: Proactive Security Challenge testing the HIPS/behaviour blocker components of the apps. take a look at this: You posted 3 screenshots: some of the features in this screenshots are tested in matousec? so is not about firewall... is about HIPS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.