I read somewhere else that they use Windows firewall instead of Zone alarm as the Windows firewall gave him less file monitor hits.I noticed with Windows firewall that it blocks all incomming calls but I couldn't find where it asks me if I want to block outgoing calls. Zonealarm asks me this. Am I missing a setting in theWindows firewall?JimCYWG

Unless it's changed recently, Windows firewall only blocks incoming, not outgoing. I use ZoneAlarm for that very reason. I caught a nasty trojan some time back, and ZA saved my bacon by preventing it from calling home.

The person in question could have been me. Since I use the XP F/Wall when simming only. Zonealarm all other times.This issue of outgoing raises an interesting point which I'll definitely think twice before continuing this practice.thanks

Might have been you Max, I'am not sure. It was here somewhere. I have switched to zone alarm as I want to monitor everything. Nobody gets in, nobody gets out. Thanks for responding.JimCYWG

>I read somewhere else that they use Windows firewall instead>of Zone alarm as the Windows firewall gave him less file>monitor hits.>I noticed with Windows firewall that it blocks all incomming>calls but I couldn't find where it asks me if I want to block>outgoing calls. Zonealarm asks me this. Am I missing a>setting in the Windows firewall?No. XP firewall can only block incoming connections. It will warn you only when a connection from outside is made to a port which is actually in "listening" state (which means, that some application has opened this port for incoming connections). This *may* catch certain trojans, but not all, because if the trojan initiates a outgoing connection to a "well known" port (ftp, http etc.), the xp firewall won't do anything.ZA does block outgoing but is presumably one of the worst (because it uses an incredible amount of resources) desktop firewalls. I wouldn't say that such a desktop firewall which can block outgoing traffic is a bad idea (it certainly isn't) but if I were to choose one, it would definately not be ZA.Back when XP did not have its own firewall, I was using sygate, which was pretty good at this time (and very resource friendly).I use XP firewall, because incoming protection is really all I need. If you ever *need* outgoing protection, your system is already hosed, because it means that some trojan/malware/whatever is already where it actually should not be.Some think this adds to security, but I disagree. I don't even use a virus shield and I don't feel "unsafe" :) I simply don't like software which hogs my resources and slows down my PC. Tests have shown that the combination of ZA + Norton AV together can slow down a PC by up to 30% (of course, depends on the type of application, but in the worst case, this number is very much possible).Maybe a coincidence, but I've never suffered from low fps, stutters or blurries and my system is not high-end by todays standards.A simple way to protect yourself and avoid about 80% of all problems is very simple: Don't use the common virus construction kits, also known as Internet Explorer or Outlook and keep the system up to date via windows update. At least, mandatory security updates should be checked (and installed) once a month.

>I use XP firewall, because incoming protection is really all I>need. If you ever *need* outgoing protection, your system is>already hosed, quite true, good point.

I have always used Zone Alarm as I want to know what is going out from my machine (did you know that FS9 and FSX always request access to the internet when started?). I also have never suffered with poor frame rates or stutters and I've just done a quick check and there's absolutely no difference in frame rates whether Zone Alarm is running or not. So I think I'll stick with it.Phil