App Review Best Firewall for Windows (The PC Security Channel)

[Andy Ful]

This video is typical for Leo (I do not say that it is a bad video). He simply has already opinion about something, and the video is a kind of suggestive presentation. It is intended to explain why he thinks so. Many followers wrongly think that such a presentation can prove that Leo's opinion is right or objective. This can be partially understood because many of his videos include the malware test (skipped in this video). Leo does not claim that his testing can prove something, but he also does not accept that in fact, such testing cannot prove anything interesting.
The above can be accepted for the video which is a presentation of personal opinion.

Of course, his video is not comprehensive for many reasons, for example:

• He probably disabled Cloud file lookup (many people do not like it).
• He mentioned some important CF features but totally skipped the auto-sandbox feature.
• He did not mention how the CF security can be strengthened by activating auto-sandbox (like for example in @cruelsister setup).

Anyway, he presented how CF will react (in his setup) to some ransomware samples to explain why he recommends CF as probably the best firewall for a typical user (except hardware firewalls).
Although the video is not a comprehensive presentation of CF capabilities, it shows pretty well why Leo recommends CF to typical users.

 

[Lenny_Fox]

May be it is me, but I guess most people of my generation have a look at what other users tell about a product or a brand. The positive (advocate like admiration) reviews made have a look at Comodo, but the public domain information (e.g. Wiki) sort of lists a lot of blunders in regard to security of their website, their SSL business and the way they responded to the intrusion (state driven turned out to be a single hacker).

I am not distrusting them because they make errors, but it is the way how they respond to errors which makes me worry. Even the endorsement of CruelSister don't entice me to try their firewall. The list of started and abandoned projects seem awkward: when they have such a good FW (with HIPS/BB/Sandboxing) why did not they put their development effort into the product which made their name (the Comodo FW)?

Maybe some more seasoned/experienced forum members can shed their opinion views on this to educate me on this topic.

 

[show-Zi]

A newbie, or basic, user just installs and doesn't mess with settings.

My guess is that comodo users tend to actively want to tweak the settings, regardless of their experience or knowledge.

 

[Chuck57]

I know a couple of Comodo users. Neither does anything but install, BUT I also admit they're old, like me, and tweaking software or doing much beyond surfing or word processing is a step beyond our ability. I agree that Comodo tends to attract the geek crowd.

 

[ErzCrz]

May be it is me, but I guess most people of my generation have a look at what other users tell about a product or a brand. The positive (advocate like admiration) reviews made have a look at Comodo, but the public domain information (e.g. Wiki) sort of lists a lot of blunders in regard to security of their website, their SSL business and the way they responded to the intrusion (state driven turned out to be a single hacker).

I am not distrusting them because they make errors, but it is the way how they respond to errors which makes me worry. Even the endorsement of CruelSister don't entice me to try their firewall. The list of started and abandoned projects seem awkward: when they have such a good FW (with HIPS/BB/Sandboxing) why did not they put their development effort into the product which made their name (the Comodo FW)?

Maybe some more seasoned/experienced forum members can shed their opinion views on this to educate me on this topic.

A lot of things have changed with Comodo over the years. 2-3 years ago and then projects got abandoned and more focus went to the Enterprise Itarian forums and products. I started to lose heart when a with Comodo when the unpatched vulnerability was discovered. The enterprise clients got the security fix a full 3 weeks before that fix was available for private users. That and communication became very sparse and some months before updates.

A lot of these side projects ended up starting out as something and then tha technology getting imported to other products, eg CCAV features moved into CIS. Time machine was shut down because the auto-containment became a lot more powerful etc.

I stopped using Comodo for a big portion of last year, just trying out betas or helping other users. Lots of promises and then delayed releases isn't helping matters.

Anyway, that's a bit OT, I still use it here and there to help out others as I believe in the power of containment but I have more piece of mind using hardening tools like Hard_Configurator from @Andy Ful . There's probably more I could say here but just use what suits you best.

 

[Andy Ful]

I think that there is no doubt about the strength of Comodo Firewall. The problem is that the strongest settings are too strong for many people and sometimes also for the Windows system (happened to me a few times).

 

[Back3]

I like Comodo firewall. I've been using it on and off for the last 2 years. My brother, who is a tech, use it. Nowadays, it's on my computer. But I would never install it on my friends computers. They would hate me! You need a good basis of computer knowledge to live easily with it.
Even if you're computer savvy, if you are a tweaker, Comodo is not for you. It loves stability!

 

[FALC0N]

I like Comodo firewall. I've been using it on and off for the last 2 years. My brother, who is a tech, use it. Nowadays, it's on my computer. But I would never install it on my friends computers. They would hate me! You need a good basis of computer knowledge to live easily with it.
Even if you're computer savvy, if you are a tweaker, Comodo is not for you. It loves stability!

You can actually set it up so that ordinary users can use it. Just disable the HIPS, make sure the firewall is set to safe mode, and enable the auto-contain and virusscope. It's really well behaved in this configuration and still very effective. Comodo AV comes with this configuration by default, but it doesn't let you opt out of the Anti-virus. So if you want to use the this configuration with the firewall only, you have to configure it manually or just turn the AV off.

 

[show-Zi]

In my opinion, comodo should narrow down the direction of this software a bit more to avoid a crowded and complicated setup. In other words, it would be better to cut down on either the hips or the sandbox.

This software's function as a firewall is quite practical. I think the source of the controversy lies in the supplementary but powerful hips and sandboxes that surround it.

 

[TairikuOkami]

I think the source of the controversy lies in the supplementary but powerful hips and sandboxes that surround it.

Indeed, I used CF without HIPS and the fancy "toys" and it worked pretty well, but people always want "the best" and then suffer like the rest.

 

[Divine_Barakah]

Indeed, I used CF without HIPS and the fancy "toys" and it worked pretty well, but people always want "the best" and then suffer like the rest.

The best, the rest. Like the rhyming.

 

[Freud2004]

The best in protection also means the worst in compatibility. I still remember all BSODs I had. Good old Comodo times.
Recommending Comodo Firewall to average users is just wrong, if you do no include a warning. I recommend them Glasswire.

I agree, I like a lot Glasswire, but I believe it is not a firewall by itself because it uses the Windows firewall and give the user better perception of what's going on in the SO, and easy way to make rules, and deny or allow services.

 

[show-Zi]

Indeed, I used CF without HIPS and the fancy "toys" and it worked pretty well, but people always want "the best" and then suffer like the rest.

I believe that the key to using this software is to use it within the limits of what the user understands.
For example, there are cs settings that utilize the sandbox. And in the past, umbra has actively adjusted and used Hips. I don't think either is wrong.
People who want the 'strongest', who try to easily incorporate both arguments, will find themselves in a maze of complex settings.

 

[Chuck57]

I run my CF in Cruelsister settings, but with HIPS enabled and in Safe mode. I go no further. The last time I tried writing a rule for anything was using DOS 5, maybe 30 years ago, and as I recall it caused me to have to reinstall Windows 3.

So, I leave rule writing to others and activate Proactive setting in CF, then click the boxes per Cruelsister's instructions, and call it done.

 

[Ink]

I've watched a few of his videos over time, and I am of the opinion he goes into them with the view that this or that software will fail, and it's his job to make it happen. Either that or he has an agenda (which is the same thing in different words). Either way, I stopped watching his stuff long ago. It appears from this and others here he hasn't changed.

YouTube is an entertainment and educational platform. He's made his own success by combining both, and it shows by the engagement.

 

[Chuck57]

YouTube is an entertainment and educational platform. He's made his own success by combining both, and it shows by the engagement.

I agree, but he's presenting his results as fact, and making claims about various softwares based on his often flawed or altered findings.

 

[Brahman]

I agree, but he's presenting his results as fact, and making claims about various softwares based on his often flawed or altered findings.

We can't force everyone to represent the full truth, some will be half backed, some will be with out truth, some with profit motive, it's upto us, the viewers to accept what's beneficial to us, not to get blinded by misrepresentations and employ our commonsense before acting upon it. So everything is fare in war and love and YouTube videos.

 

[Chuck57]

We can't force everyone to represent the full truth, some will be half backed, some will be with out truth, some with profit motive, it's upto us, the viewers to accept what's beneficial to us, not to get blinded by misrepresentations and employ our commonsense before acting upon it. So everything is fare in war and love and YouTube videos.

I agree with all you said. We can't make them do an honest, factual, balanced video. For you, for others here, even for me, we watch and notice errors or discrepancies. People out there in the world look at his channel, see how popular it is, and figure the software he's testing is crap because he says it is.

I can use one of my own hobbies as an example. I enjoy metal detecting. I watch videos of various makes being tested, to see what's new and to see how the various machines have improved, how they perform, what depth they hit on coins, how well they discriminate metals,, how sensitive they are, etc.

On one very popular Youtube site, my machine that I've had for several years was tested. The guy testing it knows metal detectors and metal detecting inside and out, but by the time the test of my machine was half finished, it was clear he either didn't now my metal detector or (more likely) he wasn't a fan of the brand. The settings he used were ridiculous, and he never made an effort to adjust them to attain the best sensitivity for his soil, nor to discriminate out junk metal like aluminum tabs, etc.

Thus, the detector I use, that has found a lot of coins and relics, looked like cheap garbage that even a kid wouldn't want - whereas I and thousands of others like me know it's just the opposite. At the end, he solemnly pronounced that he could not recommend the metal detector based on his tests.

If I was in the market for a new detector, I'd avoid the model based on his findings. But, it happens to be the one I currently use, and I know better. However, people new to the hobby who are checking into it and find this very popular Youtube site, will watch and assume that model of metal detector is trash, because the man is an expert and says so. And that is how I see PC Security Channel and his software tests. Both use their 'fame' improperly.

 

[Behold Eck]

Fair enough video imo, pity about the nord/sophos adverts but that seems to be the way of everything.

Leo was always good for a heads up on a product showing the ui, settings, how much resourses it used etc.So even if you disagreed with the testing methods at least you got a feel for the way it behaved.

Comodo is still an enigma to me as I still don`t know if I love it or hate it ??

Regards Eck