Battle MSE w/ Comodo firewall VS COMODO IS 5.8

[3link9]

So I had a thread awhile ago about Avast vs Comodo and I was just looking at some optional windows updates and I saw MSE as a option and I was thinking about using it but I don't know if I want to stick with Comodo or switch to MSE w/ Comodo's firewall. What do ya think?

 

[Dieselman]

RE: MSE VS COMODO IS 5.8

Both av's are very poor in there detection rates. So why bother running 4 processes and using a combo of MSE and Comodo when you can use CIS which uses 2 processes and less ram. What CAV lacks it makes up for in D+ and the sandbox. Go with CIS. The purpose of a suite is so that its the only thing you need running. Just like why would you use NAV when you can use NIS. Why use KAV when you can use KIS. Same thing.

 

[Deleted member 178]

RE: MSE VS COMODO IS 5.8

yes. just use CIS (its detection improved a lot lately even of it is not at the top of the pyramid). MSE is not a very good one actually. if you really want a combo, you should choose Panda Cloud AV free + Comodo FW.

 

[Jack]

RE: MSE VS COMODO IS 5.8

MSEw/ Comodo firewall or CIS 5.8 ?
So basically you want to know what antivirus engine is better... MSE or CAV! I can tell you that any antivirus engine can only detect around 80% of the zero day malware that is found into the wild. If you have decided to use the Comodo Firewall (which has a HIPS engine integrate it) than it won't really matter much which antivirus are you using..... MSE , Avira , Panda etc.... I would go with CIS because like Maximus said you'll have less processes running and a lower system usage....
For what is worth ,after testing CAV in my VM I can tell you that this AV has a very good heuristic engine, which will manage to detect more zero day malware then MSE but MSE has been officially tested with good results by many independent organizations so that's a '+' for the Microsoft AV.Also to be noted that MSE has a huge number of users so they should have a definition for a threat quicker than COMODO.
I would also advise you to start a thread in this forum : http://malwaretips.com/Forum-PC-Security-Configuration-Wizard

 

[moonshine]

I'd rather use Comodo Internet Security itself. They pointed out my reasons already so no need to imply mine.

 

[McLovin]

I would have to go with Comodo Internet Security as well because:

1. The antivirus engine is much better.
2. You can get alot more options out of CIS than MSE.
3. When MSE removes a virus it takes forever.
4. Doing a scan MSE take up to 2 hours to finish a full system scan.
5. Plus you can get the WHOLE suite for free, if you get CIS.

So why get something else instead of using the whole product, that is FREE?

Comodo is my choice.

 

[Dieselman]

@ McLovin. CAV's detention rate is not any better then MSE's. They are both in the mid 80's. You cannot compare CIS with MSE. You can however compare CAV with MSE.

 

[McLovin]

@ McLovin. CAV's detention rate is not any better then MSE's. They are both in the mid 80's. You cannot compare CIS with MSE. You can however compare CAV with MSE.

Oh, I see. Well out of the both of them I would still use CIS over MSE.

 

[Dieselman]

@ McLovin. CAV's detention rate is not any better then MSE's. They are both in the mid 80's. You cannot compare CIS with MSE. You can however compare CAV with MSE.

Oh, I see. Well out of the both of them I would still use CIS over MSE.

Your miss understanding the persons question. He did not ask if CIS is better then MSE. He asked if using MSE w/Comodo Firewall is better then using CIS. Big difference.

 

[AyeAyeCaptain]

It's better to use CIS as you are less likely to have conflicts when new versions come out, also it will be less resource usage.

@Maximus: I do kinda confute what you say with Comodo AV and their detection rates been so poor, as from what we've seen from many sources it's slowly but surely getting better and better and is certainly in the top bunch of them.

 

[Dieselman]

Until CAV gets tested by AVC or VB100 its meaningless. Most CAV testing is done by Comodo sponsored sources. Unfortunately AVC will never test CAV and either will MRG. CAV also has a very high FP rate where as MSE does not.

 

[House_maniac]

It's better to use CIS as you are less likely to have conflicts when new versions come out, also it will be less resource usage.

@Maximus: I do kinda confute what you say with Comodo AV and their detection rates been so poor, as from what we've seen from many sources it's slowly but surely getting better and better and is certainly in the top bunch of them.

+1 since comodo 5.8 the av detection is much better than before,now the av part quarantine the virus as soon as its detected,much better than v 5.5
And yeah its better to use CIS than use Comod Firewall with NSE,because MSE kinda of sucks as it just a tradional and normal antivirus they are not doing anything to it.And the part which i really dont like is that it relies on windows update to update the virus database,so if you check you will notice that you miss virus database updates most of the time like tha.t

 

[Deleted member 178]

Until CAV gets tested by AVC or VB100 its meaningless.

It is done at same time than CIS, when CIS hang around 85, CAV is 79

http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/rap-index

Most CAV testing is done by Comodo sponsored sources. Unfortunately AVC will never test CAV and either will MRG. CAV also has a very high FP rate where as MSE does not.

There is an old issue between MRG and Comodo ( http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1968914&postcount=940) MRG claims than their mysterious simulator bypassed CIS, when later tests made by people and Languy showed the opposite...MRG honest (and did a mistake) or Comodo haters...?

Anyway i "trust" only AVC.

When tested by VB100 it has only 1 fp, (EAM got 2 fp, ) it failed to have the certification because of that.

http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/test?recent=1

Btw CIS get the VB100 certification one time:

http://malwaretips.com/Thread-Comodo-gets-VB100-Certification?highlight=vb100

 

[Dieselman]

You do not have to inform me of issues with MRG. I am very aware of that. The main issue of why CAV will never be on top or tested by certain sites like AVC is cause Melih and his Comodo team do not take to criticism well. If CAV scores low then they blame the tester. Been that way for year so rather then hearing a sob story from Comodo they just exclude them. I have been around longer then most of you have been alive so there isn't anything you can tell me that I do not already know. CIS is a very good product my the CEO and other various members ruin its reputation. Heck there were at least 2 Comodo mods who were fired cause they brought up vulnerabilities in CIS.

 

[Deleted member 178]

You do not have to inform me of issues with MRG. I am very aware of that. The main issue of why CAV will never be on top or tested by certain sites like AVC is cause Melih and his Comodo team do not take to criticism well. If CAV scores low then they blame the tester. Been that way for year so rather then hearing a sob story from Comodo they just exclude them. I have been around longer then most of you have been alive so there isn't anything you can tell me that I do not already know. CIS is a very good product my the CEO and other various members ruin its reputation. Heck there were at least 2 Comodo mods who were fired cause they brought up vulnerabilities in CIS.

I know about the Mods, and you are perfectly right about Comodo's officials position about testing organizations. They use loops to justify the fact they dont want to participate in comparison tests.

Btw it was also for inform others members who don't know the whereabouts and the fact it was tested by VB100 (you made a small mistake)

 

[Dieselman]

And when you look at the VB100 site I see only "1" certification. Only one. Nothing to brag about when 4 other VB100 tests failed it due to false positives.

 

[Deleted member 178]

And when you look at the VB100 site I see only "1" certification. Only one. Nothing to brag about when 4 other VB100 tests failed it due to false positives.

I dont mind about 1 or 1000 certifications, i just say the fact, it was tested and gains one certification, you said it was not tested ..., i corrected your mistake that is all (nobody is perfect), even me i did some mistakes and said something without verifying the info.

Remember that some people reading the forum will take what you said at the letter.

 

[HeffeD]

Heck there were at least 2 Comodo mods who were fired cause they brought up vulnerabilities in CIS.

Mods are expected to bring up vulnerabilities if they discover them...

 

[Dieselman]

Heck there were at least 2 Comodo mods who were fired cause they brought up vulnerabilities in CIS.

Mods are expected to bring up vulnerabilities if they discover them...

Lol.Thats all good but being terminated thereafter is not. And MRG tried being up vulnerabilities and Comodo banned them. When someone brings up an issue that doesn't mean to turn your back and argue. Instead simple say "Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We will look into it further". Anytime someone brings up an issue to Symantec they look into it and do not ban people. Criticism is something we learn from and not take to heart.

 

[Plexx]

Going off topic I'm enjoying this "argument"... but...

Going on topic:

(...)I have been around longer then most of you have been alive so there isn't anything you can tell me that I do not already know(...)

That is a rather arrogant statement don't you reckon? I am sure there are other ways to say what you mean but the impression you are giving any reader at this moment is like showing to us that you are the one who always right who never makes mistakes and you are better than any one of us...

Not the first time you come across like that...

Just an observation, feel free to ignore my comment should you wish to do so, but I had to point it out...