App Review Comodo Internet Security 11 Review | Test vs Malware

[Nestor]

Content source

https://youtu.be/JPESRmqFXjg

 

[Moonhorse]

Says comodo didnt pass it

Doesnt even open sandbox:emoji_expressionless: The video doesnt even make sense

 

[Nestor]

Seems one malware bypass containment.

 

[Moonhorse]

Seems one malware bypass containment.

but it doesnt run, he shouldve showen then containment atleast

 

[Nestor]

but it doesnt run, he shouldve showen then containment atleast

I suppose he erased the container but i am not sure.

 

[Sunshine-boy]

there is also another comodo sandbox bypass

 

[Deleted member 178]

As i said before, CIS is good enough , no need combining CFW with any 3rd party AV.

 

[Nestor]

there is also another comodo sandbox bypass

In this video malware was contained but it was able to bypass it and make changes.At Leo's video we don't know if it was contained at all.

 

[Sunshine-boy]

.At Leo's video we don't know if it was contained at all.

it's Comodo fault if it failed to auto sandbox the malware(or malware probably bypassed the sandbox).

 

[Deleted member 74454]

Its all speculation due to vagueness of method and recording. This is the show boating I was speaking of, that has done nothing but left all of you confused, while the OP gains traffic, beautiful huh?!

 

[Mahesh Sudula]

 

[AtlBo]

This is the problem I have when people test software but cannot explain the protection scheme. The tester's "I am just one of you so the a-v has to please me", should only go as far as how the settings are arranged and how protections are managed. Beyond this, the tester is a tester, not a consumer user->he is an educator. Instead, this guy constantly acts like it's not his job to know how the program works in all his videos. Well, his videos go down the tubes because of this of course.

So on to Comodo. So I believe what we are seeing is what malware can do when the container is set to run at default settings. Also, the sandbox was not emptied which is HIGHLY recommended after a bout on a system with over 1000 malwares...oh yeah. Also, @cruelsister has it right. If you want to have 100% bullet-proof protection against malware--->default block rather than virtualize. And please remember to empty the sandbox if not . Thankyou...

Oh, one last thing. I think we should recall all of the ransomware and REALLY horrible malware that Comodo has blocked in videos from @cruelsister and others. We've seen it contain "limited", "partially limited", and block, and we have seen the difference with our eyes. Traces will be on the system with "limited" and "partially limited" and wallpaper can change, etc. Yet, even then no infection have we seen, even from the worst and most brilliantly constructed (if you will) malwares.

 

[ZeroDay]

This is the problem I have when people test software but cannot explain the protection scheme. The tester's "I am just one of you so the a-v has to please me", should only go as far as how the settings are arranged and how protections are managed. Beyond this, the tester is a tester, not a consumer user->he is an educator. Instead, this guy constantly acts like it's not his job to know how the program works in all his videos. Well, his videos go down the tubes because of this of course.

So on to Comodo. So I believe what we are seeing is what malware can do when the container is set to run at default settings. Also, the sandbox was not emptied which is HIGHLY recommended after a bout on a system with over 1000 malwares...oh yeah. Also, @cruelsister has it right. If you want to have 100% bullet-proof protection against malware--->default block rather than virtualize. And please remember to empty the sandbox if not . Thankyou...

Oh, one last thing. I think we should recall all of the ransomware and REALLY horrible malware that Comodo has blocked in videos from @cruelsister and others. We've seen it contain "limited", "partially limited", and block, and we have seen the difference with our eyes. Traces will be on the system with "limited" and "partially limited" and wallpaper can change, etc. Yet, even then no infection have we seen, even from the worst and most brilliantly constructed (if you will) malwares.

Absolutely spot on

 

[Nestor]

This is the problem I have when people test software but cannot explain the protection scheme. The tester's "I am just one of you so the a-v has to please me", should only go as far as how the settings are arranged and how protections are managed. Beyond this, the tester is a tester, not a consumer user->he is an educator. Instead, this guy constantly acts like it's not his job to know how the program works in all his videos. Well, his videos go down the tubes because of this of course.

So on to Comodo. So I believe what we are seeing is what malware can do when the container is set to run at default settings. Also, the sandbox was not emptied which is HIGHLY recommended after a bout on a system with over 1000 malwares...oh yeah. Also, @cruelsister has it right. If you want to have 100% bullet-proof protection against malware--->default block rather than virtualize. And please remember to empty the sandbox if not . Thankyou...

Oh, one last thing. I think we should recall all of the ransomware and REALLY horrible malware that Comodo has blocked in videos from @cruelsister and others. We've seen it contain "limited", "partially limited", and block, and we have seen the difference with our eyes. Traces will be on the system with "limited" and "partially limited" and wallpaper can change, etc. Yet, even then no infection have we seen, even from the worst and most brilliantly constructed (if you will) malwares.

Totally agree.Comodo has so many unique characteristics, in the way functioning, that souldn't be tested with Leo's "automatic test running programm" because it missed the whole point.

 

[ZeroDay]

This is just MY personal opinion, but Leo shouldn't be testing any security software in my honest opinion he's clueless.

 

[Arequire]

Also keep in mind Leo was running it in the "Internet Security" configuration instead of "Proactive Security" configuration.

Internet Security configuration:

• Only commonly infected files/folders are protected against infection.
• Only commonly exploited COM interfaces are protected.

Proactive Security configuration:

This configuration turns CIS into the ultimate protection machine. All possible protections are activated and all critical COM interfaces and files are protected.

Comodo Preset Configurations, Firewall Security | Comodo Internet Security

Regardless, whether running CIS in proactive would've helped is unknown.

 

[ForgottenSeer 72227]

This is the problem with people like Leo, act like they know everything, sound really smart, but in reality they don't explain things very well and its very obvious that they don't know how the product works, or what it's capable of. It's very obvious from watching some of his videos that he does have bias towards products he likes and products he doesn't like. Also many times his reasons for not liking a product are pretty lame IMO.

 

[bribon77]

Thanks for the video ... But ... a while ago I'm using Comodo Firewall. and I have not had any problem with the configuration of @cruelsister, I think it's excellent. "I tried it and the applications of malwares that were executed have not been able to achieve their goal in Comodo."

 

[ForgottenSeer 72227]

Also keep in mind Leo was running it in the "Internet Security" configuration instead of "Proactive Security" configuration.

Regardless, whether running CIS in proactive would've helped is unknown.

This is very true

This is the one problem I have with some of these videos is that they don't really take the time to explain the actual product and how different settings could have an impact on its protection capabilities good or bad. Granted that most people like to test everything at default settings as that's the setting(s) most people will use, but I always feel like if you are going to take the time make a video to test/review a product, at least take the time to explain the WHOLE product, its settings and what each of them can do. Sometimes just turning on one or 2 settings can make a significant difference in its capabilities...or not, but regardless it should still be discussed.

 

[Nestor]

This is very true

This is the one problem I have with some of these videos is that they don't really take the time to explain the actual product and how different settings could have an impact on its protection capabilities good or bad. Granted that most people like to test everything at default settings as that's the setting(s) most people will use, but I always feel like if you are going to take the time make a video to test/review a product, at least take the time to explain the WHOLE product, its settings and what each of them can do. Sometimes just turning on one or 2 settings can make a significant difference in its capabilities...or not, but regardless it should still be discussed.

Maybe sometime in the future AV vendors must consider the possibility to sell their products with high/hardened settings at default, will help them also for marketing reasons having good test results.