Battle Comodo IS vs Webroot

[Nomad]

I know Comodo is free and Webroot is paid.

But both have similar approaches to security, i.e, prevention rather than detection.

I was just curious as to which is superior at:

1) Prevention
2) System performance
3) Detection

 

[Deleted member 178]

1) Prevention : CIS
2) System performance: WSA
3) Detection: CIS

 

[tapoo]

i love to go with Comodo because its FREE and performs quite OK .....
K9 + WOT + CIS would be my setup [using in my Windows 7 SP1 64bit installation]

 

[illumination]

1) Prevention : CIS
2) System performance: WSA
3) Detection: CIS

I do not think this is much of a contest, and system performance would not be an issue for either of these!

 

[Exterminator]

CIS! WSA is very light but neither one has a performance issue on my system

 

[Ink]

Since Webroot acquired Prevx, isn't it now completely a cloud-based antivirus solution?

 

[Nige_40]

Since Webroot acquired Prevx, isn't it now completely a cloud-based antivirus solution?

Yes Earth, It's all Cloud Based. So it will always be up to date.

 

[Plexx]

Since Webroot acquired Prevx, isn't it now completely a cloud-based antivirus solution?

Yes and no.

As confirmed by another user and after further checking, if offline, it will record all the necessary information and then send it to servers when online. Journaling function I believe is what you can call it. It is also tied up to its rollback feature.

 

[Nige_40]

Since Webroot acquired Prevx, isn't it now completely a cloud-based antivirus solution?

Yes and no.

As confirmed by another user and after further checking, if offline, it will record all the necessary information and then send it to servers when online. Journaling function I believe is what you can call it. It is also tied up to its rollback feature.

Further enough Bio, I read what it says on the Product page.

But I kind of see, on what your saying is true.

 

[raxa707]

both are light but comodo is better

 

[Plexx]

both are light but comodo is better

It's not really which one is better since both are just as good. what is more important is the user's knowledge in terms of security products because Comodo is not a walk in the park, despite having a great help on its website for each settings etc, terminology is more advanced/trivial to some users.

To basic put:

1.Pop ups vs No Pop Ups (in its prevention protection module)
2.Advanced Customization vs Minimal Customization
3.Lightness
4.Prevention protection modules approach
5.Scan Speed
6.Removal
7.Features
8.Price
9. GUI

So lets have the above answered:

1. Comodo has more pop ups due to HIPS versus hardly any from WSA
2. Comodo offers more advanced customization (note however both solutions work just fine out of the box on stock settings!)
3. Both are light but WSA is even lighter whilst during scan (CPU/RAM/I/O)
4. Comodo uses HIPS + BB incorporated (version 6 only, version 5.10/5.12 is HIPS only). WSA uses a BB type module amongst others (web shield, identity shield, core shield).
5. Comodo Scan in 5.10/5.12 takes awhile, while on 6.0 is faster due to improvements. WSA still fastest.
6. Comodo has the lead on removal approach, however WSA removal approach is based on journaling technique and rollback (once it is detected) so both are just as good - just a different core approach
7. WSA have same type of features (Sandbox): Note that both sandbox/virtualization function differently in its own ways.
8. Comodo is free, WSA is paid unless you grab the 6 months trial giveaway.
9. GUI: Subjective but WSA is more clean in my opinion. CIS 5.10/5.12 is just fine too but V6 is a bit more complicated in some ways.

Detection: Comodo has more detection but either one does just fine for average user.

 

[Deleted member 178]

I will add WSA BB can be set to works almost as an HIPS.

 

[Plexx]

I will add WSA BB can be set to works almost as an HIPS.

I've been staring at its Behavior Shield and other options. I'm not really seeing much to customize. Unless it is based on silence as opposed to "noisy".

Need to explore this further and dedicate more to it.

 

[Defender]

webroot failed the av comparitives test exept performance it succeded in performance cause it does nothing

 

[Plexx]

webroot failed the av comparitives test exept performance it succeded in performance cause it does nothing

And when was the last time you used WSA? let me guess never.

If a solution fails on these tests, does it mean is a bad solution? No it doesn't.

If we go by these tests, BitDefender is always ranked top 3. Does this mean BD is a very good solution? Actually it isn't.

From unfixed bugs to the slowest scan per file ratio, BD has its share of problems.

 

[Deleted member 178]

webroot failed the av comparitives test exept performance it succeded in performance cause it does nothing

and you have no clue how WSA works and believe in testing labs, the perfect victim...

 

[Defender]

webroot failed the av comparitives test exept performance it succeded in performance cause it does nothing

And when was the last time you used WSA? let me guess never.

If a solution fails on these tests, does it mean is a bad solution? No it doesn't.

If we go by these tests, BitDefender is always ranked top 3. Does this mean BD is a very good solution? Actually it isn't.

From unfixed bugs to the slowest scan per file ratio, BD has its share of problems.

actually i did test webroot secure anywhere and its very light and has good prevention but has a high number of FPs and is bad at detection against zero day threats.

 

[Ink]

Defender, how many AV software excel in "detection" of preventing 0-day threats?

 

[Defender]

Defender, how many AV software excel in "detection" of preventing 0-day threats?

well g-data does a decent job + F-secure and also webroot is not very good at detection with older virus files im just saying that webroot is not that good and webroot has a good prevention but is not so good at detection where as comodo is better at detection and does a fair job at prevention that is all that i have to say : )

 

[Deleted member 178]

actually i did test webroot secure anywhere and its very light and has good prevention but has a high number of FPs and is bad at detection against zero day threats.

it is not the first time i heard about WSA' lot of FPs; but i never got any...maybe people should tweak it a bit, especially the heuristic tab.