ActiveArmor

[cr0ssfire]

I'm going to be building a system to replace my current burned-out desktop, and I've set my sights on the DFI LanParty Ultra-D (I know, you all must be so proud of me). Yeah, it's definitely what I had in mind for the ideal motherboard - crazy good overclocking capabilities, helpful indicator lights and can be modified to SLI if I so choose to. Oh, and basically every tech forum on the internet to help me out in the process. What's not to like?

But there's one thing I'm not sure about. Not that it'd defer me from buying the board one way or another, but I can't help but wonder whether ActiveArmor will actually help keep my computer secure or not. I'm extremely picky about keeping my computer secure, y'see, and not being able to find virtually any opinions on AA has been extremely frustrating for me. If you've got any experience with using it, does it actually work well or is it something you could do without?

 

[GadgetBuilder]

If you're on broadband then a router should be part of your setup; the router includes a firewall that is effective in preventing access to your machine from outside.

The nVidia firewall then is secondary, mostly preventing programs on your machine from accessing the net without you knowing about it. If you have a good AV program and don't do risky things which might let an intruder program run on your machine then it is arguable whether this second firewall is useful.

I run nVidia's NAM and it accesses my disk 3 times per second; this is one of the less common problems with the NAM but there are many other problems with it. Most users find it works well but a small (random selected) group of users runs into problems of varying types. Visit the nVidia forum, notice that the most read link concerns NAM problems, read about these problems and make an informed decision:
http://forums.nvidia.com/index.php?s=f3...ead353326152f9b12af806c46&showforum=34

Notice that nVidia is doing nothing to address even the common problems which are described on their forum -- so it is unlikely, should you encounter a problem, that it will ever be fixed.

 

[bradley]

It sucks that Active Armor still doesn't work correctly.... maybe we'll have to wait for Nforce5.

 

[Tanclearas]

:thumbsdown:

I had NAM working well in the 6.39 drivers. Every single attempt to upgrade to later versions results in spontaneous reboots that could only be fixed by disabling NAM. Unfortunately, I am also trying to resolve crashes in BF2, so it means that I at least need to try the newest nForce driver (6.66). Trying the new driver meant completely disabling NAM.

It amazes me that Nvidia really provides no help whatsoever to people experiencing problems with NAM. The most help I've received came from users on forums. The only thing I haven't tried yet is completely reinstalling. It just seems crazy that I'd have to reformat just to install updated drivers.

 

[CheesePoofs]

bleh. Why bother?

I'm on a router and DMZ'd (which I believe essentially means that every request to contact my network gets forwarded directly to my computer). I just use a free software firewall (Kerio Personal Firewall). I ran my antivirus program (AntiVir), Adaware, and spybot a few weeks ago after having this same setup and not running any of them for two months. I had one piece of spyware. I think I'm pretty safe

 

[bradley]

Originally posted by: CheesePoofs
bleh. Why bother?

I'm on a router and DMZ'd (which I believe essentially means that every request to contact my network gets forwarded directly to my computer). I just use a free software firewall (Kerio Personal Firewall). I ran my antivirus program (AntiVir), Adaware, and spybot a few weeks ago after having this same setup and not running any of them for two months. I had one piece of spyware. I think I'm pretty safe

If properly implemented, I believe on-board firewalls hold the same promise as on-board video and audio. It makes it fast and easy to get a computer up and running. In fact, I would have loved to be able to enable NAM on my mom's & sister's computer builds. Unfortunately, Nvidia is on the second incarnation of NAM, and neither works effectively.

 

[cr0ssfire]

Mmm...I see. After a little poking around, it seems that I can't find a whole lot of people who have a lot of glowing things to say about ActiveArmor. Or any people at all who seem to have had a really good experience, honestly.

ZoneAlarm it is!

And for the squeamish among you, I'm going put up a software firewall on a system with a San Diego 3700+! There's no other core to take over the duties! Oooooo! :laugh:

 

[ChiPCGuy]

NAM (to generically include the nVidia Firewall and Active Armor for purposes of this discussion) sucks BIG TIME. It will BSOD, cause network connectivity issues, corrupt downloads, jack with CPU usage in a full networked environement (not just one PC on the net, but a real network). Bad news. I never load NAM, and always go with the default XP firewall. My hardware firewall is a router with SPI, so between those two I am pretty well protected with the addition of AVG and SpyBot.

 

[vanvock]

Originally posted by: ChiPCGuy
NAM (to generically include the nVidia Firewall and Active Armor for purposes of this discussion) sucks BIG TIME. It will BSOD, cause network connectivity issues, corrupt downloads, jack with CPU usage in a full networked environement (not just one PC on the net, but a real network). Bad news. I never load NAM, and always go with the default XP firewall. My hardware firewall is a router with SPI, so between those two I am pretty well protected with the addition of AVG and SpyBot.

DITTO!

 

[marstein]

NAM doesn't work for me either. In addition it installs and runs A WHOLE TOMCAT WEB SERVER for administration. I had it running once, but it damaged downloads. I am now using the Yukon/Marvell port and things work (except the firewall)

 

[AnandThenMan]

Like everyone is saying, it is total garbage. Avoid at all cost.

 

[R3MF]

Originally posted by: ChiPCGuy
NAM (to generically include the nVidia Firewall and Active Armor for purposes of this discussion) sucks BIG TIME. It will BSOD, cause network connectivity issues, corrupt downloads, jack with CPU usage in a full networked environement (not just one PC on the net, but a real network). Bad news. I never load NAM, and always go with the default XP firewall. My hardware firewall is a router with SPI, so between those two I am pretty well protected with the addition of AVG and SpyBot.

The Firewall and Activearmour work flawlessly on my PC, and always have done.

i have no idea is AA enabled applications/games see any benefit, but it certainly hasn't caused any harm.

 

[Puffnstuff]

I tried running nam when I installed windows x64 and it blew chunks right off the bat. Cut my bandwidth down to nothing and wouldn't even let outlook send and receive email without garbling it. Once I realized that nam was to blame I dumped it and am currently running tiny software firewall 64 which is doing just fine.

 

[bhazard451]

Even though I have had problems with NAM in any version higher than 6.53, it allows me to attain much higher download speeds than with any software firewall. Im talking 100+k more. Very strange but true.

 

[sep]

uninstalled! I had many problems with it. Using kerio now...Knock on Wood, Ouch did that hurt! :roll:

 

[Spacecomber]

This has been a few months ago, but I tried to set up active armor on a customer's computer who used AOL. I could not get the computer to connect properly to AOL with active armor running. I think it was causing a crash (my memory is a bit vaque at this point). Yeah, it's hard to know who to point the finger at if AOL is part of the picture, but when I disabled active armor, I had no more trouble setting this computer up.

It's too bad; I thought that this would be an excellent alternative to running WinXP's built in firewall (I'm thinking in terms of people who need something simple but effective, because they don't necessarily know a lot about these kinds things), but in the end I couldn't make use of it. For this paricular build, active armor was the main reason that I decided to go with the ultra instead of the plain or basic nforce4 chipset. I could have saved some money, it seems.

Space

 

[imported_Husky55]

The subject of NAM (Nvidia Active Armor) is a really confused one for ME.

When I first got my Epox 9NPA Ultra (my signature) I installed the Expox CD for Nvidia 6.37 driver chipset which included NAM. Windows XP + SP2 and all the upgrades and everytning worked perfectly.

But being a glutton for punishment I installed the Nvidia 6.53 and then the 6.66 latest chihpset drivers. I had nothing but BSODs and of course was NEVER again able to make NAM to work. not that I missed it, it's just annoying.

So annoying that I clean installed XP and XP2 and went through the MS activation again and was able to install 6.66 Nvidia drivers. But no NAM. It just did not work!!!

I really envy people who had no problem with NAM, the mysteryof which eludes me.

 

[Bellerophon]

Me too. Neither the first nor (supposedly improved) second download would work properly. The administration engine makes it very hard to troubelshoot and the active network manager thing (the bit that should alert and recommend a course of action on detecting ilicit network behaviour) didn't work at all.

The idea is sound, a hardware packet inspection to free that duty from the processor but in practice.... it just doesn't work.

I've gone back to Norton personal firewall and let my BB router do the donkey work. Deeply dissapointed that NVidia have seemed to abandon NAM and maybe that should tell us something.