http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r17120360 en Sun, 29 Nov 2009 00:51:20 EDT Sun, 29 Nov 2009 00:51:20 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17394487 sag44 : "A Real Tragedy" Going on 3rd Year of using this awesome program trouble free, and hadn't heard about this recent development. I'm in total Agreement with previous posts as to the excellence and superiority of this program. Thought:Unfortunately this is probably another corporate buyout where someone is counting all their money at some tropical paradise. My mindset on similar scenarios: "when all the Wally Mart's & Home Depottt's take over the small guy; we'll be forced to buy whatever they want us to have and can charge whatever they want, since we longer have any other choices"]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17394487 Mon, 04 Dec 2006 11:18:27 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17369241 sultan_emerr : It was nice while it lasted.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17369241 Thu, 30 Nov 2006 02:54:28 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17357378 Yorky9 : I lament the passing of Tiny too. I still use it, and have learned so much by building up a robust set of Firewall And Windows Security rules.

The product wasn't perfect (it had some problems with wildcards as one example), but for me it was head and shoulders above the rest of the competition, and in most cases, even after a lengthy stagnation, still is.

Only now are some security software emulating what Tiny did, and I have not yet found a suitable replacement. Tiny's GUI was sometimes criticised, but they made huge improvements in the latest incarnations. I am still impressed with this product, and wonder just how good it might have been had development not stopped.

One thing for sure, CA products will NEVER touch my PC!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17357378 Tue, 28 Nov 2006 12:52:35 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17174997 gwion : Tiny was a fantastic piece of work. It's a little involved, both functionally and conceptually, for a lot of users, but I've thought, from the very beginning, that it was a best of breed and one of a kind product. Secure4u, acquired by Tiny just after the Kerio spinoff, was the one single stable iteration of a "true" system wide sandbox app. Tiny, by that acquisition, became the definitive behavior-blocker, and has never, yet, been matched in that regard.

The grand thing about Tiny is that it's not just a firewall, it's the best design for an anti-trojan there is. Simply identify those behaviors which are suspicious and abnormal, and block them. No need to micro-analyze files every so often, update detection databases, just watch what they do and what they access, and, if that looks dicey, based on what an app normally does, stop the behavior and alert the user. There are certain things a non-system app just ought not be trying to access or do... isn't it better, frankly, to watch for those behaviors and block them, than to try and keep track of every piece of malware out there, one by one? Proactive response versus reactive response.

I lament the passing, if, indeed, it's a passing, of Tiny. We need to keep the idea alive, though. It's the future of firewalling, I think. Ultimately, operating systems might become self-defending, using concepts similar to Tiny/Secure4u's... but I doubt that will be any time soon. Until then, I think we need to support and promote the concepts. Simply, it's just the best way of proactively addressing the threats we haven't yet dealt with... reactive apps require somebody to get infected, discover the infection, and report the same... then, the app developers have to add a pattern match to a database, release a daily update, and, after a few thousand of us have already been compromised, release it... and hope we remember to download our update. Tiny-like apps might need regular updating, but only in so much as a new (previously thought harmless) behavior is linked with a new approach to hackin' an' crackin'.

Maybe (wishful thinking?) Tiny is returning to its roots? Remember, the original Tiny, now Kerio 2.x, was the packet filter element from Tiny's enterprise solution "CMDS" (centrally managed desktop security) system. It also served the classic NAT app, Winroute Pro, in the same capacity. CMDS, I remember saying in here, a few years back, was around the best and most articulately implemented enterprise firewall ever conceived. What happened to it? Well, the old versions were sold off to a (Chinese, I think?) firewalling developer... but the concept became Tiny Enterprise...

CMDS worked on a distributed responsibilities concept. The core was a dedicated security server at the corporate IT center. Each machine ran a packet filter, an ids, a sandbox, and so forth, but the user couldn't tamper with them, even if he was using a company laptop, at home. Simply, as soon as the machine accessed the VPN, the security server checked it out, compared it to the database, and, if anything in the firewall config didn't match the "last known good" config databased on the security server, it denied the computer access to the network, and rewrote the "correct" config back to it. It could also see the logs, and would be able to determine whether the remote machine had been compromised while improperly configured. Nice piece of work. :)

CA, I know, is now mostly concerned with enterprise solutions. I sincrely hope that, at least, they don't shoot this great idea behind the barn, but incorporate it into their own offerings. Hell, the only thing that honestly can be said in any negative sense about the CMDS concept is that it was just scratching the surface of the kind of security solutions we can be looking at ... of course, as we all know, too, security is often the seven-toed redheaded child of enterprise IT... but that's a new topic for another day... Tiny, it's good to 'ave known ya. Hope you inspire many new generation developers to pursue the road less travelled, towards excellence in concept and design...
--
Semper Eadem

Unconditional love
I'll be there when you fall
The one condition of love ...
... is there are none at all.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17174997 Sat, 28 Oct 2006 19:22:48 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17172383 CixDesign : Coreforce looks very promising, on my test I had some issues that forced me to uninstall but it's shaping up to be the most similar to what Tiny was.

SD ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17172383 Sat, 28 Oct 2006 11:10:02 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17158256 Khaine : What about coreforce? I know its no where as developed or as polished as tiny. But it does seem promising. If we all help contribute to it, we can make it just as good; if not better]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17158256 Thu, 26 Oct 2006 04:56:49 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17137747 degauss1 : FYI, the TPF is now a part of the eTrust EZ Armour (consumer) suite now as well as eTrust Integrated Threat Management suite(SMB and Enterprise). CA bought this company so they could own rather than OEM the personal firewall bits. Developement is ongoing - just as part of a bigger product for CA. Can't argue support is worthless about these types of questions but that's usually they way of big companies - L1 support are treated like mushrooms.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17137747 Mon, 23 Oct 2006 02:27:38 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17123289 madirish : I've been using Tiny since 5.0 and I'll continue using it for the time being.I don't believe there's anything that currently can replace it.

As far as CA is concerned .....]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17123289 Fri, 20 Oct 2006 13:01:58 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17123011 roberteyewhy : Yes, what a shame! I have been in contact with them for months now. CA just continues to amaze me with how inefficiently they do business.

As stated on their page:

"If you are interested in evaluating the CA HIPS product before it is released and would like more information:

* In the United Sates and Canada, please contact CA Customer Care at +1 888 423-1000, choose menu option 4, then menu option 1.

Just called and as usual, CSR has NO CLUE what I was talking about. I could go on and on about CA's "promises" that they were going to do this and do that in regards to TPF but never did.

In essence, they just took peoples money on a product that they knew would not have ANY more support or updates.

I have been using TPF from the VERY beginning and it was/is a truly great firewall. But, now with CA's involvement, like Norton's, this will probably no longer be true! ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17123011 Fri, 20 Oct 2006 12:05:20 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17120360 madirish : "TINY Software No Longer Available
TINY software products are no longer available. We encourage you to review the CA product offerings that are designed to meet the needs of the Enterprise, SMB or Consumer markets. We have created the links below to help you locate the product offering that meets your organization’s requirements."

found it by going to Tinys forum which is no longer available but get redirected here:»www.ca.com/tinysoftware/

what a shame. :(]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,17120360 Thu, 19 Oct 2006 21:54:56 EDT