Mops21

Level 28
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
Hi all

Comodo Internet Security 2019 v12.0.0.6882 – Released


Hi All,

We are pleased to announce release of Comodo Internet Security 2019 v12.0.0.6882.

Here are the details:

Online Setup Details

Comodo Internet Security Premium

http://download.comodo.com/cis/download/installs/7030/standalone/cispremium_installer.exe
Size: 5.4M ( 5637360 )
MD5: 36ea4d3e5331812f6d045e2bfc893f05
SHA1: 7be07df8fb95419670b85efd1b65ffde79b8daaf

Comodo Antivirus
http://download.comodo.com/cis/download/installs/7030/standalone/cav_installer.exe
Size: 5.4M ( 5637352 )
MD5: 7d0da57c318e9a60d70d740bfa56dc0e
SHA1: ab1ed9eda6ee55fb65abd3c16a9385fa66241846

Comodo Firewall
http://download.comodo.com/cis/download/installs/7030/standalone/cmd_fw_installer.exe
Size: 5.4M ( 5637352 )
MD5: 57fbd3c15b02de94aecf6d74cc040569
SHA1: e9c772f76bdf031b49f41f91077e90e1e8ef4af1


Changes comparing to previous release 12.0.0.6870

New


  • Added support of Chrome 76 for web-filtering

Fixed

Please note, this release has been rolled out for new users.
We shall be rolling out updates for existing users over the next few weeks.

Thanks,
Comodo Internet Security Team.

With best Regards
Mops21
 

Windows_Security

Level 23
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
CVE-2019-3969: Local Privilege Escalation (CmdAgent.exe)
In 2017 Comodo would be just one the many security products clueless against process hollowing techniques, but it is 2019 now and it concerns the flagship functionality of the sandbox. Why react so late?

CVE-2019-3970: Arbitrary File Write (Modification of AV Signatures)
This is to silly to comment about: allowing LOW privilege processes to modify the signatures?

CVE-2019-3971: Denial of Service (CmdVirth.exe)
Hardcoded NULLs used for a memcpy source address? Really?
 

ZeroDay

Level 28
Verified
Malware Tester
I'd still put a CS tweaked Comodo Firewall up against ANY paid suite. There's no denying theres issues but there's issues in every product. It's very, very rare we see a system that's protected by CF at CS's or similar settings bypassed. I honestly think CF is an amazing product. However! They do rely too heavily on the sandbox alone and if CF/CIS became as popular as some of the big names that auto sandbox would become a big target. We've all seen CF at CS settings deal with Malware that would destroy a lot of products and it does it with ease using hardly any resources. WD+CF or KFA+CF is amazing protection in my opinion. CF on it's own tweak correctly has kept my dumb cousin safe for years. When I say dumb I mean he just doesn't listen to my advice and clicks on anything he wants to, but his system is as clean as a whistle so to speak.
 

shmu26

Level 85
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
I'd still put a CS tweaked Comodo Firewall up against ANY paid suite. There's no denying theres issues but there's issues in every product. It's very, very rare we see a system that's protected by CF at CS's or similar settings bypassed. I honestly think CF is an amazing product. However! They do rely too heavily on the sandbox alone and if CF/CIS became as popular as some of the big names that auto sandbox would become a big target. We've all seen CF at CS settings deal with Malware that would destroy a lot of products and it does it with ease using hardly any resources. WD+CF or KFA+CF is amazing protection in my opinion. CF on it's own tweak correctly has kept my dumb cousin safe for years. When I say dumb I mean he just doesn't listen to my advice and clicks on anything he wants to, but his system is as clean as a whistle so to speak.
CruelComodo, whatever criticisms one may have, is still default-deny. Default-deny always wins over traditional AV suites.
But it might be interesting to pit CruelComodo against Kaspersky with TAM. I would still bet on CruelComodo due to better script protection, but that's just a guess.
 
Top