Okay, it has long been debated how best to protect your PC while using P2P applications. Its like the old Pepsi vs Coke debate, firewalll vs Peer Guardian. Well, here I intend to offer up credible pros and cons for using Peer Guardian 2.
Firstly, PG2 blocks IP addresses BEFORE they can connect, blocking all IPv4(TCP, UDP, ICMP, etc), all the while using 0% CPU. Instead of blocking aggressive connections and vulnerable ports it uses a blocklist of connections to deny entirely. A firewall alone won’t be foolproof if you’re using a P2P application because obviously you’ll have the port(s) open you’re sharing your content on. Also, PG2 can be set to self-update so you can set it up and then forget about it.
Two additional points noted by Phrosty, the coder of PG2, and JFM , who deals with press relations for PG2, are that "…a normal firewall doesn’t have the capability to import that many ranges easily. PeerGuardian 2 can auto-update, and generally is a(n) ‘install-and-forget’ solution."
But, as can easily be deduced from the fact that PG2 is basically an IP blocker, is that those whom you wish to avoid while using P2P applications can simply do what? Change their IP addresses. It’s that simple for them, so one has to hope that the blocklists are regularly if not frequently updated, which they are pruported to be. In fact the list of adresses is some 886 million and counting.
So the answer to it all is Coke AND Pepsi, PG2 AND a firewall. I think ultimately, it’s best tu run BOTH. You’re never going to have 100% protection in anything you do ever, so the best you can do is protect yourself as much as you can. Running a combination of the two is the best method of doing so in my opinion.
Related Posts
- Future of peer-to-peer file sharing networks remains uncertain
- Peer to Peer Traffic: A Catalyst in Media Evolution
- Sony refused peer-to-peer patents
- Viruses turn to peer-to-peer nets
- Going straight: Peer-to-peer entertainment deals
Loading ...
