CF with CS - Good Enough Alone?

[Deleted member 178]

OK CFW/CS users, Umbra feels it has serious bugs. CS, you want to weigh in?

i don't "feel", it is proven.

 

[AtlBo]

OK CFW/CS users, Umbra feels it has serious bugs. CS, you want to weigh in?

Only reply I could think of here I guess would be...show me an instance where instability has led to a system compromise with v10 of Comodo. I haven't seen any reports of a Comodo system even being infected where weakended settings choices weren't linked to the cause.

I do get the point altogether. I mean, Comodo has the reputation for bugs from its history of bugs so to speak. Still don't hear the complaints of compromise from Comodo users, though...even here on MTs where the news would surely travel quickly. If it were on Wilder's I think it would quickly be here too...

Maybe in a perfect world it would be great to see someone run Comodo Firewall on their main PC and then regularly batter the setup with malware. It would mean a number of considerations (very impractical), but it would be interesting to see weekly reports on the status of Comodo and how it's holding up to the blitz LOL...

 

[Deleted member 178]

@AtlBo you would be right if i was the only one encountering it, but no.
- rules disappearing out of the blue without notice, known since 10+ years, still unfixed.
- the latest sandbox restriction level bug on Win10.

Those 2 are enough for me to ditch Comodo for good.

 

[Garzaman]

@Garzaman...if you do happen to test some malware, could you post some test results? Anything would be nice with regards to actually seeing how OSArmor handles malware.

I already have a fairly high degree of confidence , but there is always the old adage, "trust but verify"

"Trust but verify" wise words, the most serious sentences are used to walking hand in hand with irony.

I am collecting examples, I will share with you, gladly, the results

 

[AtlBo]

@AtlBo you would be right if i was the only one encountering it, but no.
- rules disappearing out of the blue without notice, known since 10+ years, still unfixed.
- the latest sandbox restriction level bug on Win10.

Those 2 are enough for me to ditch Comodo for good.

@Umbra...I understand. You have higher expectations from the perspective of the reliability of the total software package. I'm only saying that any bugs that may exist aren't leading to compromises as far as I know. Comodo does seem very good at protecting itself when there are system issues. It will still run.

BTW, anyone seen a recent report of disappearing settings? I haven't seen this since way back in v8. That said, I can see how it would even be unacceptable to some users that having to click out of settings using the "OK" dialogs is a requirement for settings changes to be saved. The settings dialogs are not at any level "live" so to speak. "Xing" out of any dialog means the change is not recorded, and that is kind of annoying. Definitely, it's something to get used to, and something I have wanted to explain to users many times. I guess it could even be viewed as strange from a security program, idk. At any rate, it seems to me the core protection is solid now...in spite of the presence of a couple of small nuisances I'd like to see improved or fixed. I don't notice them...only the alerts firing on the spot and on the money, so that's the main thing for me at this point .

It makes sense to expect a high degree of polish from a security program, but somewhere at Comodo, some clean dev thinking appears to have rescued the protection capability of the concept. I feel confidence in a big way for v11. Maybe some will reevaluate at that point, idk. Again, I understand 100%. I mean, for goodness sake, the concept for CF is foolproof enough to run solo or with an a-v for the parranoid...so why do I have a-v (with sandbox), AppCheck (protect me from my own wayward curiosity stupidity), and EMET? Also running a second firewall too which I like better than the Comodo one...better logs. BTW, almost forgot, NVT ERP is busy in the tray recording activity in its logs, which I find more useful than Comodo's. They have helped numerous times on this PC with syncing an event to time from various logs.

Looking forward to the program achieving the reliability polish the protection concept clearly has. Until they are the same, it seems clear to me that you will have a point with a number of users with regards to your reliability concerns...

 

[AtlBo]

I am collecting examples, I will share with you, gladly, the results

Sounds very exciting, so thankyou very much. I do wish I were a malware tester , but I believe that I am too geared to breaking things LOL. If I ran malware, I would probably find a way to break it rather than complete the test. Too many curiosities I have to test, and there are so many details associated with doing so...

I like testing apps and seeing how they will break or hold up over time to a battering of system activity.

 

[cruelsister]

Guys- Just like there are those that are click happy on the Internet, there are those that just cannot leave a Security Application's box unchecked or make unneeded Rules. Essentially these are self-created issues and if an issues present because of this lack of understanding it will be considered a "Bug".

I know it goes against conventional wisdom, but with CF simplicity (my settings) will result in zero bugs and better protection than would be accorded with other Home User security apps.

As examples, look at the "Worst Thing Ever" video that was posted a few weeks ago about Comodo making some things Partially Limited instead of Restricted on Windows 10. Did the Poster report that any compromise of the System occurred? Did He (I know it could not possible be a She) realize that the Comodo Sandbox has been upgraded (even at the "Partially Limited" setting) to contain even trivial malicious processes? Did we see any differentiation between Containment at the PL level and the Restricted level? Of course not...

And today as a second example is a Meta video that can only be considered ridiculous (or babies first attempt using Metasploit). Reminds me of what a former Mentor told me before my first lecture: "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit".

Anyway, please understand that with Comodo you will see Haters- reasons ranging from the CEO being a Shmuck to the Mods on the Forum being mean to User-created 'bugs". Obviously you as an independent user can do as you like- but just understand that if some see the Comodo taskbar icon being more orange than red this is seen as a major flaw, but when I (will) post a major issue for a currently well-regarded security application this will go without notice or comment.

(I guess I've been here too long...)

 

[illumination]

Guys- Just like there are those that are click happy on the Internet, there are those that just cannot leave a Security Application's box unchecked or make unneeded Rules. Essentially these are self-created issues and if an issues present because of this lack of understanding it will be considered a "Bug".

I know it goes against conventional wisdom, but with CF simplicity (my settings) will result in zero bugs and better protection than would be accorded with other Home User security apps.

As examples, look at the "Worst Thing Ever" video that was posted a few weeks ago about Comodo making some things Partially Limited instead of Restricted on Windows 10. Did the Poster report that any compromise of the System occurred? Did He (I know it could not possible be a She) realize that the Comodo Sandbox has been upgraded (even at the "Partially Limited" setting) to contain even trivial malicious processes? Did we see any differentiation between Containment at the PL level and the Restricted level? Of course not...

And today as a second example is a Meta video that can only be considered ridiculous (or babies first attempt using Metasploit). Reminds me of what a former Mentor told me before my first lecture: "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit".

Anyway, please understand that with Comodo you will see Haters- reasons ranging from the CEO being a Shmuck to the Mods on the Forum being mean to User-created 'bugs". Obviously you as an independent user can do as you like- but just understand that if some see the Comodo taskbar icon being more orange than red this is seen as a major flaw, but when I (will) post a major issue for a currently well-regarded security application this will go without notice or comment.

(I guess I've been here too long...)

I have found and seen many issues with CIS over the years, enjoyed some BSOD's along the way. I have also at points monitored the event viewer while running CIS, there is some issues going on in the background most are not even aware of, but with this said, you are quite correct CS, that for free, CIS provides a serious level of protection compared to the others.

 

[SearchLight]

Guys- Just like there are those that are click happy on the Internet, there are those that just cannot leave a Security Application's box unchecked or make unneeded Rules. Essentially these are self-created issues and if an issues present because of this lack of understanding it will be considered a "Bug".

I know it goes against conventional wisdom, but with CF simplicity (my settings) will result in zero bugs and better protection than would be accorded with other Home User security apps.

As examples, look at the "Worst Thing Ever" video that was posted a few weeks ago about Comodo making some things Partially Limited instead of Restricted on Windows 10. Did the Poster report that any compromise of the System occurred? Did He (I know it could not possible be a She) realize that the Comodo Sandbox has been upgraded (even at the "Partially Limited" setting) to contain even trivial malicious processes? Did we see any differentiation between Containment at the PL level and the Restricted level? Of course not...

And today as a second example is a Meta video that can only be considered ridiculous (or babies first attempt using Metasploit). Reminds me of what a former Mentor told me before my first lecture: "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit".

Anyway, please understand that with Comodo you will see Haters- reasons ranging from the CEO being a Shmuck to the Mods on the Forum being mean to User-created 'bugs". Obviously you as an independent user can do as you like- but just understand that if some see the Comodo taskbar icon being more orange than red this is seen as a major flaw, but when I (will) post a major issue for a currently well-regarded security application this will go without notice or comment.

(I guess I've been here too long...)

Thanks 'sis for the input.

Gives some peace of mind. I should add that different viewpoints can help a user make an informed decision. I have set up CF according to your video, and just for the hell of it, added their AV module for the rare moment just in case.

 

[AtlBo]

@cruelsister mentioned Qihoo Essentials. I wonder if she can verify whether it is still ad free? If so, there is no reason not to use it as long as it still contains the sandbox.

I have now replaced 360 Total Security with 360 Essentials. Big improvement with no ads...only the sneaky attempt to install Opera, which I didn't hate being installed honestly. I don't have FF on this PC, so I needed a second browser. Wanted to get a good look at Opera anyway.

Essentials with the sandbox is excellent. In SUA, all the elements will function if key .exes are set to run as administrator for all users. That's the advanced option for running as administrator. Without doing this settings aren't accessible, and I believe sandbox configurations will not be available, nor the access tab for accessing files in the sandbox.

for this switch. I think this is an honest look at the engineering in Qihoo, and it's pretty good (maybe the best since it's very light with no extra processes constantly attempting to run) running with Comodo. Thanks to @cruelsister for the reminder about this older version...

 

[Brahman]

I have been a comodo user from 2008 on-wards and i must say i never had to re image my systems because of any malicious activity ( but i had to re image several times because of some (beta) testing of comodo products) and i have never paid them any money, hence i don't care who runs their business, what happens in their forum etc. If the product is good today i use it, if it goes bad (to me) tomorrow i will change it. To my knowledge CIS is not the core revenue making business of Comodo as a company, and i doubt it hardly makes enough to keep dedicated programmers in developing the product, If i were in control i would have diverted developing effort to something that makes enough profit for the company.This is not at all an excuse to support comodo or use their product but its enough for me to appreciate their effort and stay away from bashing them on TRIVIAL ( on serious issues you should) issues. Oh and by the way I use CF+ Zemana on windows 10 64 bit machines along with WD.

 

[SearchLight]

I have now replaced 360 Total Security with 360 Essentials. Big improvement with no ads...only the sneaky attempt to install Opera, which I didn't hate being installed honestly. I don't have FF on this PC, so I needed a second browser. Wanted to get a good look at Opera anyway.

Essentials with the sandbox is excellent. In SUA, all the elements will function if key .exes are set to run as administrator for all users. That's the advanced option for running as administrator. Without doing this settings aren't accessible, and I believe sandbox configurations will not be available, nor the access tab for accessing files in the sandbox.

for this switch. I think this is an honest look at the engineering in Qihoo, and it's pretty good (maybe the best since it's very light with no extra processes constantly attempting to run) running with Comodo. Thanks to @cruelsister for the reminder about this older version...

Based on C'sis and your recommendation, I too have now installed Q360Essentials, and uninstalled the AV module in CIS to revert back to just to CF/cs. I will try it out until Cruelsister makes a final determination whether it is worth it. I know, may be overkill but does not seem to hurt the RAM.

Btw, if anyone is interested in a website to test their AV response, you can try this one:

Feature Settings Check for Desktop Solutions – AMTSO.

Except for the antiphishing page, Qihoo360E or CF/cs passed each test. In other words one or the other responded to the test presented.

 

[SearchLight]

Based on C'sis and your recommendation, I too have now installed Q360Essentials, and uninstalled the AV module in CIS to revert back to just to CF/cs. I will try it out until Cruelsister makes a final determination whether it is worth it. I know, may be overkill but does not seem to hurt the RAM.

Btw, if anyone is interested in a website to test their AV response, you can try this one:

Feature Settings Check for Desktop Solutions – AMTSO.

Except for the antiphishing page, Qihoo360E or CF/cs passed each test. In other words one or the other responded to the test presented.

Update: I just did a QuickScan of my PC with Q360E, and it flagged my trusted email notifier PopPeeper as a Trojan? I am uninstalling Qihoo now. So much for trust. Never had any AV that I ever used in years flag PopPeeper as a Trojan.

I can see now why several posters here dislike some AV's. I guess this goes to False Positives. Maybe QE360E is prone?

So now the bigger question is using CF/cs, other than an AV what else would you add for the "just in case factor?" Yes, I know with CF/cs, one should be rock solid but for those who feel they need that "just in case" factor, what would be your recommendations?

 

[redsworn]

Update: I just did a QuickScan of my PC with Q360E, and it flagged my trusted email notifier PopPeeper as a Trojan? I am uninstalling Qihoo now. So much for trust. Never had any AV that I ever used in years flag PopPeeper as a Trojan.

I can see now why several posters here dislike some AV's. I guess this goes to False Positives. Maybe QE360E is prone?

So now the bigger question is using CF/cs, other than an AV what else would you add for the "just in case factor?" Yes, I know with CF/cs, one should be rock solid but for those who feel they need that "just in case" factor, what would be your recommendations?

Disclaimer: I'm not trying to defend Qihoo in any way. I don't even use any of their products.

You need to remember that in some cases FP triggers because the detected software isn't popular enough and/or new. And this kind of thing happens in any AV.
Now, you got to ask yourself these question:
1. Is PopPeeper a new software?
2. Is it popular?

There are maybe other factors that account for FP. But I feel these two are quite important to be considered.

 

[ZeroDay]

Update: I just did a QuickScan of my PC with Q360E, and it flagged my trusted email notifier PopPeeper as a Trojan? I am uninstalling Qihoo now. So much for trust. Never had any AV that I ever used in years flag PopPeeper as a Trojan.

I can see now why several posters here dislike some AV's. I guess this goes to False Positives. Maybe QE360E is prone?

So now the bigger question is using CF/cs, other than an AV what else would you add for the "just in case factor?" Yes, I know with CF/cs, one should be rock solid but for those who feel they need that "just in case" factor, what would be your recommendations?

I'd either use Kaspersky Free AV which has great signatures and a great web shield, and it works perfectly with CF. Or, I'd just use WD as your signature AV and you'll have CF for zero day stuff.

 

[redsworn]

I'd either use Kaspersky Free AV which has great signatures and a great web shield, and it works perfectly with CF. Or, I'd just use WD as your signature AV and you'll have CF for zero day stuff.

Oh, most definitely. Just like you, I'd rather use more established AVs like Kaspersky, Avast, Emsisoft, etc.
What I was trying to say is that any AVs are susceptible from FPs. Even security software like NoVirusThanks products will getting flagged from time to time. Let alone new and/or not well known software.

It's a bit ironic because just recently my EAM went nuts and flagged some of my Steam games.

 

[SearchLight]

I removed Q360E, and as suggested am trying KAFree with CF/cs. So far running smoothly together. No bloat either.

 

[redsworn]

I removed Q360E, and as suggested am trying KAFree with CF/cs. So far running smoothly together. No bloat either.

Nice combo! I think I will try similar combo when my EAM license expired.

 

[ZeroDay]

I removed Q360E, and as suggested am trying KAFree with CF/cs. So far running smoothly together. No bloat either.

I love this Combo it's very light and very secure.

 

[cruelsister]

So you guys haven't gotten any Kaspersky alerts to remove CF or any blocking by CF of the K installation? If this is no longer the case (it was last month), You Go Girls!!!