Battle Emsisoft Internet Security 8.1 vs Comodo Pro 6.3

[ifacedown]

EAM and Online Armor was my favourite.

I would like to compare the efficiency of the HIPS and BB of the two products (EAM + OA) VERSUS the autosandboxing, HIPS, of Comodo Pro.

And of course the signature-efficiency of EAM against the antivirus engine of Comodo.

And thir cloud capabalities (EAM's Anti-Malware Network against COMODO's cloud)

lastly, the lightness of the EIS and COMODO.

In summary:

Which is better in terms of:
1.) HIPS/Behaviour blocking, autosanboxing (I know EAM don't have sanboxing. I am just curious about the product's ability to fend off malware even when not using the antivirus engine)
2.) antivirus engine (EAM's dual engine vs. comodo's engine)
3.) the effectiveness of their use of cloud
4.) lightness

Thanks!

 

[ZeroDay]

I really wouldn't be able to choose between these 2.

 

[Deleted member 178]

EAM and Online Armor was my favourite.

me too

1.) HIPS/Behaviour blocking, autosanboxing (I know EAM don't have sanboxing. I am just curious about the product's ability to fend off malware even when not using the antivirus engine)

EAM has restriction/policy-based "sandbox" (similar as CIS auto-sandbox aka BB); EAM Behavior Blocker is among the best ones and its HIPS is as strong (even a bit better) than CIS one.

2.) antivirus engine (EAM's dual engine vs. comodo's engine)

EAM win even if CIS AV improved a lot lately;

3.) the effectiveness of their use of cloud

CIS win , Comodo has a bigger userbase and its cloud is quite efficient.

4.) lightness

CIS win if you consider the overall lightness since CIS is one products ; EIS is heavier due to being a double product having 2 engines, and has a long history about being demanding on resources especially during updates and boot

 

[Koroke San]

I like Emisoft anti-malware with comodo firewall

 

[Ved]

IMO Emsisoft is good choice as a on demand scanner only.

i did not feel it good on my laptop as a real time protection...to much delay in boot times.

 

[Ink]

@Umbra Polaris How does the Comodo BB work?

 

[Moose]

Emsisoft Anti-Malware never any problem's! Where Comodo is very hard to uninstall from one PC!
Making the firewall a real headache to upgrade over time. Again my opinion from my personnel use!

Malware Security tests look Emsisoft Anti-malware:
http://malwaresecurity.wordpress.com/category/emsisoft/


Malware Security Tests look at Comodo:
http://malwaresecurity.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/review1.pdf

 

[illumination]

I love both suites , but over all on windows 8.1, i would chose CIS.. It is lighter for one. OA tends to be a little more aggressive, meaning you will spend much more time allow simple things like Apps access. The last time i ran OA on windows 8, everytime i opened an App, i would have to close it to return to the desktop, to allow it, then reopen it, this got old real fast. Im sure once you have it set, it is not too bad, but i still prefer CIS to EIS on windows 8.

 

[Deleted member 178]

IMO Emsisoft is good choice as a on demand scanner only.

to much delay in boot times.

depend your pc spec, with 6gb RAM the delay is not so big

@Umbra Polaris How does the Comodo BB work?

like this:

http://malwaretips.com/threads/cis-v6-bb-hips.11819/

for v6 it is still an improved auto-sandbox (restriction-based unless you select Full virtualization) , in v7 it is supposed to be a fullfledge BB (a la EAM)

 

[ifacedown]

me too



EAM has restriction/policy-based "sandbox" (similar as CIS auto-sandbox aka BB); EAM Behavior Blocker is among the best ones and its HIPS is as strong (even a bit better) than CIS one.



EAM win even if CIS AV improved a lot lately;



CIS win , Comodo has a bigger userbase and its cloud is quite efficient.



CIS win if you consider the overall lightness since CIS is one products ; EIS is heavier due to being a double product having 2 engines, and has a long history about being demanding on resources especially during updates and boot

So for you, politely asking, what product wins in terms of protection efficiency, lightness put aside? Thanks.

 

[ifacedown]

I like Emisoft anti-malware with comodo firewall

A cross-use! Nice. I am currently using ESET NOD 32 and it conflicts with OA.

 

[Koroke San]

A cross-use! Nice. I am currently using ESET NOD 32 and it conflicts with OA.

ohh then why don't ya switch to comodo firewall? ESET works well with comodo as much i know

 

[Deleted member 178]

So for you, politely asking, what product wins in terms of protection efficiency, lightness put aside? Thanks.

i used them both since some years, and i prefer Emsisoft IS , its BB (when set as paranoid) can be as strong as CIS' HIPS so if then you add Emsi own HIPS you will be difficultly bypassed . Not sayinf EIS higher detection rate

 

[ifacedown]

ohh then why don't ya switch to comodo firewall? ESET works well with comodo as much i know

Really? I am using an old netbook - IntelAtom N455 2GB DDR3 Ram, Windows 8.1 Pro. ESET Nod32 7

The last time I used Comodo Firewall on Windows 8 Pro, (not Win 8.1), it put into sandbox two system files so my system became unstable. I have to reboot and uninstall the product to make the netbook workable again.

Are you sure Comodo Firewall is still needed if I am using the most aggressive mode of ESET's HIPS? WIndows Firewall too is maybe enough. I have good surfing habits, plus K9WebProtection. Thanks.

 

[Deleted member 178]

ESET HIPS is very young and some of its mode are quite useless, in fact only the interactive one is really securing but quite talkative.

note that you should disable ESET HIPS (then reboot) if you want use CFW without issues

 

[Koroke San]

Really? I am using an old netbook - IntelAtom N455 2GB DDR3 Ram, Windows 8.1 Pro. ESET Nod32 7

The last time I used Comodo Firewall on Windows 8 Pro, (not Win 8.1), it put into sandbox two system files so my system became unstable. I have to reboot and uninstall the product to make the netbook workable again.

Are you sure Comodo Firewall is still needed if I am using the most aggressive mode of ESET's HIPS? WIndows Firewall too is maybe enough. I have good surfing habits, plus K9WebProtection. Thanks.

well i using sandboxie & also used comodo sandbox & didn't face any problems. Comodo HIPS is quiet better then ESET. it's better u use a good firewall. i dunno about ur netbook configuration. it's worked well on my pc when i was a ESET user a month ago

 

[ifacedown]

ESET HIPS is very young and some of its mode are quite useless, in fact only the interactive one is really securing but quite talkative.

note that you should disable ESET HIPS (then reboot) if you want use CFW without issues

Yes, I might disable ESET Hips but, doing it will also disable eset's self-protection. its self-defense is a component of hips. what should i do?

yup, the interactive mode is quite talkative.

 

[Koroke San]

Yes, I might disable ESET Hips but, doing it will also disable eset's self-protection. its self-defense is a component of eset. what should i do?

yup, the interactive mode is quite talkative.

You can re-enable self-defence after a restart.

 

[ifacedown]

ESET HIPS is very young and some of its mode are quite useless, in fact only the interactive one is really securing but quite talkative.

note that you should disable ESET HIPS (then reboot) if you want use CFW without issues

Thanks much. Further questions:

1.) What about setting exclusions between ESET and Comodo firewall for each other for compatability? Is it needed?
2.) Or, should I disable ESET's hips to make it truly compatible with Online Armor?

Thanks

 

[Koroke San]

Thanks much. Further questions:

1.) What about setting exclusions between ESET and Comodo firewall for each other for compatability? Is it needed?
2.) Or, should I disable ESET's hips to make it truly compatible with Online Armor?

Thanks

first try to disable ESET HIPS & see it's still conflict with Online armor. if it's still conflict then u can use comdo firewall. In ESET exclusion u can put comodo entire folder from program files & from program data & add comodo every executable in eset exclusions & same for comodo exclusion.