OverFlow wrote:the link you provided rated ZA (pro) in the top three of the ones tested???
As the saying goes, the one-eyed is king among the blind 
ZA blocked 14 out of a possible 18 and windows PFW blocked 0 of 18. ZA Sounds better to me...
(although i do see the free version is worthless)
Ok, thing is, Win PFW is not supposed to block outbound traffic at all so it does not fail in something it does not claim to do.
And, yes, I was assuming he was using the free version (I have yet to meet someone using the pro but that may just be me).
The free one really does score very low, more along the three worst if you look at the other graphs.
But that is not what matters.
Thing is, these are all well-known and -documented leaking methods. As the last site update was two years ago one can only hope the situation has improved but I wouldn't bet on it.
My point is/was that if there is at least one of these well-known methods that do get through, the whole idea of effectively filtering outbound traffic is nullified.
God knows how many less known or 0-day methods there may be so all a PFW can achive is blocking programmes that are honest about their desire to send to the net, and those ususally provide an option to turn that behaviour off (which is the better solution anyway).
And if you cannot trust the software you use to access the net, how can you trust that SW at all?
What other functionality may be there that you do not desire, yet haven't got to known yet?
Best to not use such software at all then (if you are concerned which you must be if you want to block it somehow).
Can you elaborate on your opinion to go without his software firewall at all?
Sure, my point here is that it's pointless.
Ok, A PFW is good to block inbound traffic (which Windows PFW does achieve) but not for anything else.
If you are using a router, you can do without a PFW, but, as it comes with no fees, you may just leave Win PFW up and running.
Getting an alternative (and maybe even paying for it) gives you a false sense of security and also costs you money for little in return.
So why do it?
I use ZA (suite) and i have no issues downloading - ZA doesn't block referers.
Ok, it has been several years I have been using ZA (yes, I admit it, but that was also back then when I did not have a router and Windows did not provide a PFW ) so my memory may be wrong.
It was just a guess basically, plus, I am not so sure you cannot configure it to block referrers (or otherwise mess up the config).
Note: software firewalls are inherently flawed because the nasty is already at your PC, so the nasty is halfway home to start with.
A hardware firewall / gateway is always prefered, and a combination of the two is better.
Certainly shares my view of the matter 
I mean, sure, you can use a PFW if you really like and have some resources to spend but don't get caught in the illusion you may be "save" now or "invulnerable" (really hate the new Norton ads for exactly that, making the user believe they could do anything now without having to use their brains).
