Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AtlBo" data-source="post: 758588" data-attributes="member: 32547">Anyone done an efficacy test of Comodo recently?&nbsp; Maybe these tests aren&#039;t the most helpful in terms of protection value (somewhat random samples of questionable danger), but everyone knows what Comodo does and how it blocks almost everything unsigned (or contains).&nbsp; What about 1000 malware samples in 20 minutes or whatever?&nbsp; I would like to see this kind of test for the latest version of Comodo, just because of the quirkiness and bugginess.&nbsp; Having not seen a bypass of its protection scheme, I wonder if it could be bypassed with extremely heavy and intricate activity on a PC.For now, I am going with Comodo Firewall and OSArmor.&nbsp; I think of this combination as default deny, given the way Comodo uses the TVL for containment.&nbsp; Only the cloud gets any say but almost exclusively only for allows.&nbsp; C-L allows seem kind of rare to me...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AtlBo, post: 758588, member: 32547"] Anyone done an efficacy test of Comodo recently? Maybe these tests aren't the most helpful in terms of protection value (somewhat random samples of questionable danger), but everyone knows what Comodo does and how it blocks almost everything unsigned (or contains). What about 1000 malware samples in 20 minutes or whatever? I would like to see this kind of test for the latest version of Comodo, just because of the quirkiness and bugginess. Having not seen a bypass of its protection scheme, I wonder if it could be bypassed with extremely heavy and intricate activity on a PC. For now, I am going with Comodo Firewall and OSArmor. I think of this combination as default deny, given the way Comodo uses the TVL for containment. Only the cloud gets any say but almost exclusively only for allows. C-L allows seem kind of rare to me... [/QUOTE]

Verification