Most VPN's use their own network adapter and those (or most) VPN adapters are not monitored nor captured nor filtered by Comodo FW and some VPN adapter types are not even supported by Comodo so VPN traffic still finds its way out (or in).
Comodo Firewall filters by application, protocol, port. It doesn't matter which adapter is being used.
As said before, the bug just happens at will. The amount of rules doesn't matter.
Whether rules disappear with 1 rule or 100 rules, it does not matter because Comodo stated it will never be fixed.
I don’t really think so, you have to establish benefits vs risk. Restriction to use only signed software with all libraries signed is totally reasonable. Even before Microsoft comes up with that, for years AVs have been much more aggressive towards files with no signature. Restrictions such as not executing from user space at all go too far. Is the potential trouble really worth it?
Typo. It was supposed to say "unmanaged," and not "unregulated."
Mankind does not do anything to solve a problem that it can solve until catastrophe happens. When cybercrime global costs start to reach $15 or $20 trillion (current total costs are $6 trillion), and companies, organizations and governments are having to spend trillions upon trillions for security, services and insurances just to stay on an even threshold, only then maybe - just maybe - society will be willing to make the really hard decisions and limit user rights as part of a broad solution involving users, service providers, OEMs, software publishers, governments, technology policy makers.
You know, when you start to get into sums of $10, $20 trillion dollars or euros in losses and expenses, it enters global-economy-nation-smashing territory. The entire world economy will be worth about $100 trillion, so 10% or 20% of that value is just huge trouble on many levels.
I bet if Russia hacked and destroyed half the US electrical grid through a user hack, then that might be the kind of thing that might make policy makers re-think what they are allowing people to do with devices. Or maybe hacked into air traffic control system that caused a flight to crash. The thing I know that will bring change is a home user hack that results in a precipitous nuclear meltdown of the US stock exchange and commodities markets that, in turn, caused a global economic meltdown. If that happens, then things will change.
I know that a new trend is companies suing the employees of their subcontractors directly when they cause breaches and other cyber incidents through negligence - like not protecting their company issued laptop and leaving it in plain sight on the back seat of their car or sharing it with family members.
People only want change when it affects them personally. Same with companies, but the thing with companies is that they will just pass on the huge increased expenses caused by the malware and hacking problem to consumers.
