Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Inactive Support Threads
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Security
Video Reviews - Security and Privacy
Comodo Firewall vs a new Data Stealer
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Decopi" data-source="post: 1094716" data-attributes="member: 67091"><p>Comodo is not a Security System; it's merely a security layer.</p><p>The issue arises when irresponsible fanatics attempt to market pangasius (security layer) as salmon (Security System).</p><p></p><p>Comodo is not a virus or malware detector. It functions solely as a binary blocker, and its ability to automate blocking does not transform it into an antivirus or antimalware solution (painting a pangasius with orange color, does not turn it into salmon). The binary function is always the same: either block (unknown) files or allow (known) files (where the criteria of "known" and "unknown" is dependent on a obscure subjective database). Consequently, Comodo effectiveness is entirely dependent on the user.</p><p></p><p>There is nothing inherently wrong with this approach. As a security layer, blocking or not blocking may be useful for some users, and they are free to use and advocate for this software as a security layer. However, this approach is ineffective for 99% of users (this is one of the reasons why the market largely buried Comodo years ago).</p><p>By the way, by hardening Windows security settings, users can achieve same Comodo blocking capabilities. Windows itself doesn't do that, precisely because it knows that "blocking" is not suitable for 99% of users.</p><p></p><p>Being a software user-dependent creates two main problems: 1) 99% of users lack the expertise to decide what to block or allow; and 2) A blocker does not identify virus or malware, which leads to tons of false positives and, worse, can lead to allow the execution of threats it mistakenly identifies as "known" (it already happened in the past).</p><p></p><p>The malware shown in the video posted in this thread had already been detected by most other security software on the market. It's a strain of an older, well-known malware, originally developed by teenagers. There is nothing particularly unique about this malware. Additionally, Viruscope is notorious for its inconsistency; its threat detection capabilities are erratic and unreliable. Using Comodo Antivirus or Comodo Viruscope modules carries a high 100% risk of infection.</p><p></p><p>Furthermore, the video in this thread illustrates that containerization becomes ineffective when the user authorizes the executable through Viruscope. It's also important to note that Comodo has been abandoned since 2018. In 2024, it was rebranded as "2025" just with a new facelift, without any upgrades, nor new features, nor fixes for the old bugs.</p><p></p><p>In summary, although Comodo is free, it's not recommended for 99% of users. And most users do not need a blocker like Comodo when many of the leading security systems on the market are genuine virus and malware detectors (not mere user-dependent blockers) and are available for free.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Decopi, post: 1094716, member: 67091"] Comodo is not a Security System; it's merely a security layer. The issue arises when irresponsible fanatics attempt to market pangasius (security layer) as salmon (Security System). Comodo is not a virus or malware detector. It functions solely as a binary blocker, and its ability to automate blocking does not transform it into an antivirus or antimalware solution (painting a pangasius with orange color, does not turn it into salmon). The binary function is always the same: either block (unknown) files or allow (known) files (where the criteria of "known" and "unknown" is dependent on a obscure subjective database). Consequently, Comodo effectiveness is entirely dependent on the user. There is nothing inherently wrong with this approach. As a security layer, blocking or not blocking may be useful for some users, and they are free to use and advocate for this software as a security layer. However, this approach is ineffective for 99% of users (this is one of the reasons why the market largely buried Comodo years ago). By the way, by hardening Windows security settings, users can achieve same Comodo blocking capabilities. Windows itself doesn't do that, precisely because it knows that "blocking" is not suitable for 99% of users. Being a software user-dependent creates two main problems: 1) 99% of users lack the expertise to decide what to block or allow; and 2) A blocker does not identify virus or malware, which leads to tons of false positives and, worse, can lead to allow the execution of threats it mistakenly identifies as "known" (it already happened in the past). The malware shown in the video posted in this thread had already been detected by most other security software on the market. It's a strain of an older, well-known malware, originally developed by teenagers. There is nothing particularly unique about this malware. Additionally, Viruscope is notorious for its inconsistency; its threat detection capabilities are erratic and unreliable. Using Comodo Antivirus or Comodo Viruscope modules carries a high 100% risk of infection. Furthermore, the video in this thread illustrates that containerization becomes ineffective when the user authorizes the executable through Viruscope. It's also important to note that Comodo has been abandoned since 2018. In 2024, it was rebranded as "2025" just with a new facelift, without any upgrades, nor new features, nor fixes for the old bugs. In summary, although Comodo is free, it's not recommended for 99% of users. And most users do not need a blocker like Comodo when many of the leading security systems on the market are genuine virus and malware detectors (not mere user-dependent blockers) and are available for free. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top
