App Review COMODO Internet Security 2025 Premium

[Victor M]

All you guys should consider a sales career. So many colorful illustrations. So many angles. You will close the sale selling whatever.

 

[rashmi]

Comodo, like other things, is not flawless. However, this thread contains many misleading or distorted facts, irrelevant or inaccurate comparisons, and biased and fixated remarks.

 

[RoboMan]

I think the debate has gotten way off-topic.

Comodo is not flawless. It's not a perfect product. Like none is.

It can be said that CIS may not be suitable in default settings for average users, since it relies more on Viruscope than in the sandbox, and this module is weak compared to the competition.

It should be said also that a well configured auto-containment is very strong for medium to advanced users. It will certainly help more than a traiditional-based antivirus that relies mainly on signatures.

It's also worth noting that despite it can be bypassed, mostly every product can be. And to recieve a targeted malware designed to bypass Comodo, while being a Comodo HOME USER, is really unlikely unless you're a person of interest. And if you're a person of interest, it's mostly about what you do online rather than the product you have installed.

 

[Duotone]

Auto-Containment: Click Add. Action - Choose Ignore. Edit - Browse-Files (browse the file). Click OK (all opened windows).
Advanced Protection > Scan Exclusions: Excluded Paths - Click Add-Files (browse the file). Click OK.

I found the workaround through "Unblock Application". I seem to have issues with my Win10 Desktop, there was no notification with the said file being blocked, but my Win11 laptop had no issue with the notification popping up.

 

[Helmut]

.......fanatics is always pushing garbage to users, exploiting false mantras such as: ......."I never got infected (thus, nobody is going to be infected)".....

I say the same thing! I am not an isolated case. I've been using comodo almost since it came out and I've never had just one computer with the same settings. I had and have computers and laptops with:
Windows 95, 98, XP, Millenium, version 7, 10, and now 11 and never been infected.
I've had games on it, professional activities, banking, tax returns and no virus, Trojan, rootkit or anything else.
What now?

 

[Adrian Ścibor]

Sounds like melih wrote it himself.

You made my day!

 

[Helmut]

But they are all videos from non-experts.
Everyone is free to "believe" in non-experts, whether in favor or against Comodo. But I repeat, subjective comments and tests from non-experts require "faith", they are NOT proof of anything. If someone chooses to "believe" only the positive comments/videos of non-experts, that is called "selectivity", the basis of a false conclusion.

I am not an expert, too, so I can only speak from my own experience. I have never had any malware with comodo for over two decades. I scan with other programs from time to time, currently with Hitman Pro (?), Malwarebytes, AdwCleaner, Kaspersky - none of them found anything. However, I had an expert on hand who advised me to use comodo at the time and helped me with the setup and protection mechanism. This expert is still responsible for security at a large German company today. Comodo takes a different approach
similar to a dialog in a crime thriller that I saw:

M.: “You only ever see the bad in people, there are good ones too!”

S.: “That's why I'm never disappointed.”

The next generation (and not the Old-School-methods) is zero-trust

https://fingerprint.com/blog/zero-trust-cyber-defense/
How Zero Trust Will Lead to the Next Generation of Cyber Defense

Zero trust needs many of all: money, time, staff

 

[Sandbox Breaker - DFIR]

I've had no issues with Xcitium to be honest. Mind you we use alot of hardening practices and layers and excessive monitoring and threat hunting m

 

[kailyn]

Comodo, like other things, is not flawless. However, this thread contains many misleading or distorted facts, irrelevant or inaccurate comparisons, and biased and fixated remarks.

You mean the non-expert calling comodo "garbage" and its dedicated users "fanatics" and "non-experts"?

Obviously you read @Decopi 's ridiculous arguments. All their frenetic comodo bashing reveals a lot of deep resentments. It is actually a bit disturbing how profoundly comodo and its users bother him. You ever see anybody else triggered every single time there is a post made here about comodo and they just have to do something about it - they have to log in and begin a non-stop unhinged campaign of rage posts full of false analysis and facts?

No matter what they post people are still going to make comodo videos, people are still going to watch them, and people will continue to use CIS\CF until the owner makes it no longer available. CIS\CF is what the owner wants it to be. It is up to the owner to decide their goals & objectives with a product - and not anyone else.

 

[ddave]

Wrong. All I'm saying is:
a. There are in the market many other security software (free), many times better than Comodo.

Can you list those free software?

 

[kailyn]

In this context, CIS 2025 is presented as a package of free security tools, which offers to the public a zero-trust solution at no cost.
The problem is that of all these Comodo' free tools, only one has some value ("Sandbox/Containment"). And if this tool is disabled, then any user profile will have a 100% chance of infection. Therefore, any free software on the market is better than CIS 2025.

1. Nobody would use Comodo with virtualized sandboxing disabled.
2. Home users can and do turn off all those security software "better than CIS 2025" and therefore have a 100% chance of infection.

But even if "Containment" is enabled, there are also other problems, first because there is no such thing like an "unbeatable software", and second because CIS has accumulated dangerous bugs for the past 5 years. And repeatedly, it was already proven that "Containment" is by-passable.

Please provide those "accumulated dangerous bugs" and provide evidence that they have ever been exploited or resulted in meaningful or significant harms to any comodo user.

Unfortunately, Comodo' fanatics have the terrible habit of mental SELECTIVITY, commenting only on cases where "Containment" works, ignoring all the repeated cases where "Containment" did not work, failed and was bypassed.

Please provide those "repeated cases where 'Containment' did not work, failed and way bypassed" and caused harms to any comodo user. Provide even POCs that any malicious attacker used the POC to bypass containment.

In the same way, Comodo' fanatics also selectively manipulate security reports, only using results where Comodo did well in the rankings, while omitting and ignoring the vast majority of reports, where Comodo's mediocrity is proven year after year.

Please provide even one of "the vast majority of reports, where Comodo's mediocrity is proven year after year."

Even worse, as I mentioned, the audience that consumes free software is generally home users, and this audience is "plug-and-play", they know nothing, read nothing, and they are not interested in any type of software configuration. Therefore, this public does not have the slightest idea and does not want to deal with programs that are automatically blocked by CIS "Containment" (remembering that most of the programs blocked by CIS in "Containment" do not manage to be virtualized).

Please provide evidence that supports your generalization that "this public does not have the slightest idea and does not want to deal with programs that are automatically blocked by CIS 'Containment'" (remembering that most of the programs blocked by CIS in 'Containment' do not manage to be virtualized)."

Both the automatic blocking Containment option, as well as the "ask before Containing" option, is a failed zero-trust approach for home users, because I repeat, users do not want their programs blocked, and users are "happy-clickers" (they don't know what to allow or what to block).
Therefore, same logic, any free software on the market is better than CIS 2025.

Then why do home users continue to download and use CIS? Why does "any free software on the market is better than CIS 2025" routinely fail to protect home users because they fail to detect, prevent, or correct malware? Why are there countless malware removal requests by those using "any free software on the market [that] is better than CIS 2025" but there has never been a malware removal request made by a CIS user?

It's necessary (once and for all) to put an end to the lies and myths of Comodo' fanatics: Comodo' zero-trust approach is a fallacy, because it's not a security system!

Then why do security products such as Kaspersky and Bitdefender utilize a variant of the "Comodo zero-trust approach" for their banking protections? Why would these "better than CIS 2025" products incorporate a zero-trust mechanism that is a "fallacy" and is not a "security system"?

In real life dumb binary blockers solely never worked, don't work, and never will work. That's why absolutely no security system (free or paid) ever based its strategy solely on "Containment". Program Virtualization/Containerization is very useful, but only when used as a COMPLEMENT to other intelligent (next-gen) effective security strategies.

Then how to you explain the existence and success of Shadow Defender, Sandboxie, BufferZone, Bromium, VMWare's & Oracle's virtualization products? There is also VDI. Why have these "Program Virtualization\Containerization" centric products been so effective at protecting systems? Why do home users continue to use and praise them?

In fact, in the past, a well-known free and widely used program was hacked, and Comodo' "Containment" recognized it as "known", allowed it, the hacked program ran and infected Comodo' users.

That is a single instance and it was fixed within 24 hours of being reported. Please provide additional examples as nobody can make a judgment based upon a single example. Did that case result in any harm of any kind to any comodo user?

Using Comodo while insisting on blocking what is not "known" as a security strategy... is the same as manual hardening of security protocols in the operating system itself. There is no reason to install software, when the same result can be obtained by simply manual customization of settings in the operating system (security hardening). In simple words, just by hardening, for example Windows defender and Windows Firewall, it's possible to achieve exactly same security results. Of course, this dumb strategy will block everything, making normal use impossible, unfeasible for normal users.

While comodo can be configured to behave as 100% default-deny of runtime, can you give a single example of anyone configuring and using it in that capacity? Also why do home users and organizations successfully use the various Windows hardening utilities and scripts and they have no system usability issues?

What about all the false positive blocks of programs by all those "better than CIS 2025" security software that break or cause issues with applications and the operating system?

The difference is that these software never lied like Comodo always lied, they did not present themselves as "unbeatable", and they always were honest in presenting themselves as a kind of mere binary blockers.

Please provide one statement by anyone, anywhere, at any point in time that claims that comodo is "unbeatable."

The conclusion is that the current "new" CIS 2025, where the "new" only is a different UI, under the hood is the same old software with the same unfixed dangerous old bugs, it DOES NOT serve any user profile, which is why CIS market share has always been, is and will be insignificant.

Please supply evidence of your claim that "CIS market share has always been, is and will be insignificant". Do you have reliable statistics that show the number of downloads, installs, active instances, and uninstalls of CIS over the decades?

 

[simmerskool]

fwiw, I installed comodo internet security 2025 premium on a VM (win10) to see what all the hubbub is about. have not tweaked its settings yet, running default. nothing obviously broken. no slowdowns seen. I liked using CF w/cruelsister config in the past. This time installed internet security to see what's what.

 

[kailyn]

Regarding to your comments demanding proof from me, please let's not reverse the burden of proof, it's Comodo who always makes false claims without proof, therefore the correct thing to do is to first wait for Comodo to present non-selective technical proof of its claims.

Please provide the false claims that comodo has made.

From my side, I promise to answer each of the questions that were asked above, but if you first prove (one by one) that my arguments are false. Demanding proof from me DOES NOT prove that my arguments are false or wrong. Please prove I'm wrong, and I promise I'll present all my evidence, argument by argument.

Thank you

You have made no argument. An argument is comprised of:

1. A claim (thesis)
2. Grounds (data\facts and reasons)
3. Warrants (statements that indicate the relevance of the claim based on evidence or facts)
4. Backings (additional evidence or facts that support the warrants)
5. Qualifiers (exactness of the scope or precision of a claim that ensures broad generalizations are not made)

You have never made anything other than claims about comodo and stereotypical generalizations about users. That's all you do is sling baseless statements as fact. In other words all you do is make claims without any proof. Without the remaining four elements you are not making any arguments. You are merely expressing your opinions.

You are the one making all the claims so the accountability and responsibility to prove those claims rests completely with you. When challenged to prove what you claim is fact, your tactic is to not supply credible, accurate evidence. You instead say that comodo has to prove you wrong when you are asked to prove your assertions.

I mean it should be a very simple thing for you to provide all the evidence that you directly claim exists that proves comodo is "garbage" and how dangerous it is for anyone to use it. You should have no troubles providing links to all those reports that show comodo to be terrible protection and all the "fanatics" stating that it is unbeatable. Evidently you know the size of the comodo userbase, so why not post that data here? Where are the links to all those dangerous bugs that threat actors have exploited and caused harm to any comodo user?

We are all waiting. Here is your big chance to prove how the Comodo boogeyman is the Devil's spawn and CIS is the instrument of his evil. The "fanatics" are indoctrinating the poor, hapless, unknowledgeable people out there to use comodo.

Even if you could prove such things, it would change nothing. Dedicated users are going to still make videos about CIS. They are still going to use it. People that want free security are still going to come here to MT to learn about it, so that they can use it effectively. Despite your best efforts you will change nothing.

 

[rashmi]

ridiculous arguments

Those ridiculous arguments are about as important as a clown's opinion on astrophysics - not worth your time or attention.

 

[Shadowra]

Please provide the false claims that comodo has made.


You have made no argument. An argument is comprised of:

1. A claim (thesis)
2. Grounds (data\facts and reasons)
3. Warrants (statements that indicate the relevance of the claim based on evidence or facts)
4. Backings (additional evidence or facts that support the warrants)
5. Qualifiers (exactness of the scope or precision of a claim that ensures broad generalizations are not made)

You have never made anything other than claims about comodo and stereotypical generalizations about users. That's all you do is sling baseless statements as fact. In other words all you do is make claims without any proof. Without the remaining four elements you are not making any arguments. You are merely expressing your opinions.

You are the one making all the claims so the accountability and responsibility to prove those claims rests completely with you. When challenged to prove what you claim is fact, your tactic is to not supply credible, accurate evidence. You instead say that comodo has to prove you wrong when you are asked to prove your assertions.

I mean it should be a very simple thing for you to provide all the evidence that you directly claim exists that proves comodo is "garbage" and how dangerous it is for anyone to use it. You should have no troubles providing links to all those reports that show comodo to be terrible protection and all the "fanatics" stating that it is unbeatable. Evidently you know the size of the comodo userbase, so why not post that data here? Where are the links to all those dangerous bugs that threat actors have exploited and caused harm to any comodo user?

We are all waiting. Here is your big chance to prove how the Comodo boogeyman is the Devil's spawn and CIS is the instrument of his evil. The "fanatics" are indoctrinating the poor, hapless, unknowledgeable people out there to use comodo.

Even if you could prove such things, it would change nothing. Dedicated users are going to still make videos about CIS. They are still going to use it. People that want free security are still going to come here to MT to learn about it, so that they can use it effectively. Despite your best efforts you will change nothing.

Hello and welcome.

What's the point of this?
Comodo fanboys still don't want to know...
Just ask him why he hates CIS, won't you?

By the way, I find Comodo's commu just as horrible, selling CIS as a perfect product. When I wrote to Melih to suggest improving the viral database, he simply ignored my message...

Yes it has a good score in my test, yes it made a VM totally clean (we'll thank the Sandbox lol ) but they can also improve things.... (like Kaspersky, Bitdefender and others)

 

[ErzCrz]

Jeez this topic has descended to a bicker and an argument, it's tiring. You don't like Comodo then find, don't bother using it. A new version has come out, a long awaited one that has been recoded to work with Windows 11 and they added a couple bits like TDT and BypassIO usage which is just part of Microsoft and I'm sure other AVs have started including this. Other than that the rest of it hasn't changed much because it works.

Comodo's containment was, I think, the only security product to already be protecting you when the first ransomware emerged Comodo's always been best at Firewall and Containment so just use that element and use whatever other AV you want with it, if that's the case. The new UI needs work so I recommend just using the old Lycia theme if your going to use it.

Yes, website is a mess, Comodo apparently working on that. Yes the blog hasn't been updated in 2 years but who read it anyway. Yes, there is a bugs list from version .8012 but they have been working through some of those that were still and issue with the Beta and although only a handful fixed I don't know how many of these are still an issue with the stable version. Something I hope to get time to test out.

If there are bypasses with CIS/CF default features enabled, let @cruelsister have the samples and I'm sure she'd love to have some that can bypass Comodo's security. Yes, there was @Andy Ful 's containment bypass Comodo's Challenge but that was the case with almost all other AV vendors and I wait with bated breath to see malware using that technology but it's probably just a matter of time and that file executing the command would have to be a trusted file to allow that operation.

I have a love/hate thing with Comodo. The staff primary focus is their Enterprise Solutions through Xciitum and while a few staff around to keep the light on over the past couple of years, this move to a new stable version, at least shows it's still a company priority even though a few steps down the ladder. I used Avast for awhile as they constantly release updates and put up with the buy the complete version notifications you get even with buying what was Avast Pro at the time. Comodo doesn't have the ads, just asks you about changing your search provider and DNS which you can untick and select ignore. You can even hide the Upgrade button in the settings. They don't try and upsell you anything.

Anyway, use what you want, go buy your Total versions of Kaspersky, Norton Bitdefender etc. They use Sophos where I work and I bought CyberLock this year to fill any missing gaps in whatever security setup I'm using. I'll continue to try out CIS 2025 and help those who use it as much as I can. I can always change to some other product if it's not protecting me enough.

 

[Trident]

Hello and welcome.

What's the point of this?
Comodo fanboys still don't want to know...
Just ask him why he hates CIS, won't you?

By the way, I find Comodo's commu just as horrible, selling CIS as a perfect product. When I wrote to Melih to suggest improving the viral database, he simply ignored my message...

Yes it has a good score in my test, yes it made a VM totally clean (we'll thank the Sandbox lol ) but they can also improve things.... (like Kaspersky, Bitdefender and others)

This is the problem, @Shadowra.

I am not criticising Comodo, there is a lot of fish in the cyber security space and whether users wanna have salmon or pangasius, the choice is theirs.

The problem is when certain users push stories about the non-existent Comodo perfection, users read and believe.
They manipulate users into believing that Comodo is superior to other products via cute vids that show nothing but a blatant firewall alert/prompt, manually modified scripts with no real route of infection and others.

I am not a fan of manipulation and choice-supportive bias.

If people want fairytales and stories, they can download an audiobook, this forum is not for that.

 

[HydraDragonAntivirus]

Comodo bypassed with UEFI ransomware.

 

[likeastar20]

Comodo bypassed with UEFI ransomware.

The file doesn’t get contained ?

 

[HydraDragonAntivirus]

The file doesn’t get contained ?

Yes.