Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="cruelsister" data-source="post: 1053477" data-attributes="member: 7463">The main differences are as mentioned above is that CAV, CF, and CIS now are now contained in a single installer where choices can be made by checking or unchecking the components desired. The main GUI sadly doesn&#039;t contain the handy Network Intrusion section anymore, which I personally found to be valuable from an informational point especially as most current malware types are heavily in favor of stealers which need Network access- not that they still won&#039;t be blocked, but I&#039;d rather easily view what happens.Also hopefully any bug issues some have had with Comodo on WIN 11 have been resolved. Personally I can&#039;t speak to this as I haven&#039;t had any such issues.The criticism of the AV component is valid as it is not up to the standard of K, Avast, ESET, etc; and as CF will still has VirusScope as an on-access AV component installing the on-demand AV scanner component for me is unnecessarily burdensome. Better off to skip it and just do an occasional scan with KVRT (which is best in both the removal of an infected file as well as any points of persistence) when the mood hits. One important point that is often overlooked is that in addition to VirusScope, the File Rating component is of extreme value especially when confronted by a true Zero-Day that is both validly signed AND countersigned. While other products may find now issue with such a file, it would not be considered valid by File Rating unless that file is first vetted by Comodo and determined to be benign.Other then that, under the hood the protection&nbsp; is equivalent to previous builds, which is optimal.Hope this helps!Serious question- if you are aware of any such failures and have a MD5 for such a malicious file I would really appreciate it if it could be posted as it would be of great benefit for the users of this product (and thank you in advance!).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="cruelsister, post: 1053477, member: 7463"] The main differences are as mentioned above is that CAV, CF, and CIS now are now contained in a single installer where choices can be made by checking or unchecking the components desired. The main GUI sadly doesn't contain the handy Network Intrusion section anymore, which I personally found to be valuable from an informational point especially as most current malware types are heavily in favor of stealers which need Network access- not that they still won't be blocked, but I'd rather easily view what happens. Also hopefully any bug issues some have had with Comodo on WIN 11 have been resolved. Personally I can't speak to this as I haven't had any such issues. The criticism of the AV component is valid as it is not up to the standard of K, Avast, ESET, etc; and as CF will still has VirusScope as an on-access AV component installing the on-demand AV scanner component for me is unnecessarily burdensome. Better off to skip it and just do an occasional scan with KVRT (which is best in both the removal of an infected file as well as any points of persistence) when the mood hits. One important point that is often overlooked is that in addition to VirusScope, the File Rating component is of extreme value especially when confronted by a true Zero-Day that is both validly signed AND countersigned. While other products may find now issue with such a file, it would not be considered valid by File Rating unless that file is first vetted by Comodo and determined to be benign. Other then that, under the hood the protection is equivalent to previous builds, which is optimal. Hope this helps! Serious question- if you are aware of any such failures and have a MD5 for such a malicious file I would really appreciate it if it could be posted as it would be of great benefit for the users of this product (and thank you in advance!). [/QUOTE]

Verification