The fate of COMODO ?

[cruelsister]

There are those that judge Comodo based on their AntiVirus component which indeed has been lacking of late. But an AV is really a protection relic of the past- one has to hope that malware run isn't that new and that a definition is in place. Personally I prefer solid protection over hope.

(Note that Corporations seem to agree- FireEye, Palo Alto, Qualys, and Cyberark all in the past week recorded blowout earnings as the Enterprise space moves from traditional definition based defense to other methods of protection.)

 

[Deleted member 21043]

I've been watching this thread since it was first created, at first I decided to wait first before posting, however now it's probably time I commented on it.

@cruelsister reply was very good in my opinion, also. You should be sure to read it at this link from page 1 if you haven't already:
http://malwaretips.com/threads/the-fate-of-comodo.42209/#post-349026

Now I will continue for my comment/reply to this thread.
--

I can agree that I personally also agree that Comodo seems to be lacking with the signature-based detections at least, however we have to remember that some months Antivirus companies have a good detection rate, and then maybe later in the year they lack a bit and then they get back on their feet and have a good detection rate again. Think of it like a roller coaster. They work hard day-in and day-out to add as many signatures as they can to detect new threats their heuristic engine currently does not detect, the software engineers work closely with the security analysts with the heuristic engine all the time and then there are the people who try to whitelist detected files which are clean to and try to help provide information to prevent future false positives... It's not just Comodo, it's for every security company... Every now and then they may lack detection rate.

Sandboxing is a very powerful feature, and it is included in Comodo. Of course, people become infected all the time using different Antivirus products, including Comodo, but imagine about how many infections their Sandboxing Antivirus component has saved people from. Believe me, it should be a very high number, taken into consideration the amount of malware which is spread on a daily basis and downloaded, then executed by people with or without advanced knowledge on malware and staying secure online. I am sure people who have experience with Comodo products like @yigido can also help distinguish between the Advantages and Disadvantages of the product in terms of its detection rate and performance.

BUT, let's wait and see what happens this year and beginning of next year, and see if they change the path of development and fix things.

 

[Janl92l]

About the AV module. A new "engine" is alrdy in work. Probably released on the next version 8.x in mid March. But its not sure. The only think that is sure,thats the new av module is coming. Cant wait to test it out when it is integrated in the Product. But if u tweek it right and u know what ur are doing,u dont even need the av modue. Hips/Firewall/Sandbox is more than enough for a advanced computer user.

 

[Jaspion]

By the way, all security firms should focus on security, and bug fixing is a part of that. Functionality is also a part of focusing on security, because the need for user interaction may reduce either the security of the package directly, or indirectly by means of reducing the level of system integration -- meaning users will have legit programs blocked, will get upset, and will turn off the security measures themselves, thus greatly reducing security.

McAfee may actually be the winner, by the way, in real-life security level, especially at default configurations. I don't see them going downhill either.

 

[hjlbx]

Comodo's focus is not virus signatures. Their AV component is only one of the layers available in their internet security suite.

From what I see, Comodo does not place a primary focus on shielding a system via anti-virus, anti-phishing, and malicious URL blocking. While there is nothing that one can do to bolster the AV module, one can import phishing and malicious URL blacklists.

The real strength of CIS is how it can cope with apps once they are on the system. More specifically, the Behavior Blocker, Sandbox, HIPS and file system policies do a solid, if unspectacular, job. As Cruel Sister states "they're a beautiful thing." In short, with CIS you are generally protected if you run malwares sandboxed or within the Virtual Kiosk.

Comodo has its own approach to solving the supposed problem of the obsolete AV signature model...

I wouldn't be surprised if the AV module goes by the wayside at some point in the future.

I think CIS is unjustly maligned and under-rated. As of yet, I have not seen a truly thorough review of the Virtual Kiosk. On top of it all, it's pretty darn solid for a completely free product (all you need to do to make high-level use of it is not to forget to read the 600 page User's Manual).

Let's face it...Comodo Internet Security is damn powerful, and therefore, it ain't for amateur night.

However, here is the rub...

CIS, with all it's layers of protection, with all it's additional complexity, (and with all it's confusing bugginess)... provides me, on my specific system, no greater level of security than this simple-to-use combination: Emsisoft Internet Security or Emsisoft Anti-Malware + Shadow Defender.

Call me quirky...but simple is better, ...much.

Alas, Comodo ain't goin' downhill...Melih's just going his own way.

 

[Cats-4_Owners-2]

Comodo's focus is not virus signatures. Their AV component is only one of the layers available in their internet security suite.

From what I see, Comodo does not place a primary focus on shielding a system via anti-virus, anti-phishing, and malicious URL blocking. While there is nothing that one can do to bolster the AV module, one can import phishing and malicious URL blacklists.

The real strength of CIS is how it can cope with apps once they are on the system. More specifically, the Behavior Blocker, Sandbox, HIPS and file system policies do a solid, if unspectacular, job. As Cruel Sister states "they're a beautiful thing." In short, with CIS you are generally protected if you run malwares sandboxed or within the Virtual Kiosk.

Comodo has its own approach to solving the supposed problem of the obsolete AV signature model...

I wouldn't be surprised if the AV module goes by the wayside at some point in the future.

I think CIS is unjustly maligned and under-rated. As of yet, I have not seen a truly thorough review of the Virtual Kiosk. On top of it all, it's pretty darn solid for a completely free product (all you need to do to make high-level use of it is not to forget to read the 600 page User's Manual).

Let's face it...Comodo Internet Security is damn powerful, and therefore, it ain't for amateur night.

However, here is the rub...

CIS, with all it's layers of protection, with all it's additional complexity, (and with all it's confusing bugginess)... provides me, on my specific system, no greater level of security than this simple-to-use combination: Emsisoft Internet Security or Emsisoft Anti-Malware + Shadow Defender.

Call me quirky...but simple is better, ...much.

Alas, Comodo ain't goin' downhill...Melih's just going his own way.

No, I do not see Comodo as 'going downhill', although they appear to cruise at a consistent altitude & holding pattern which safely defies conforming ..just enough to remain aloft!

Since first stumbling upon The Hall of Justice that is Malware Tips, I have fascinated over the many debates and passionate views members have expressed over Comodo's controversial & innovative quality development projects. Besides their Chromium based C....o Dragon browser which I'd found ..at times.. brilliant (..whilst feeling perplexed their security patches could not be performed within a more reasonable time frame) I've often paused to wonder what could be causing my hesitation to come around & become more knowingly acquainted with some of Comodo's products that I've really wanted to try?

...and then I read this:

"On top of it all, it's pretty darn solid for a completely free product (all you need to do to make high-level use of it is not to forget to read the 600 page User's Manual.)"

.. which had me (practically) rolling on the floor laughing!!

 

[yigido]

"On top of it all, it's pretty darn solid for a completely free product (all you need to do to make high-level use of it is not to forget to read the 600 page User's Manual.)"

.. which had me (practically) rolling on the floor laughing!!

I did not read all these things but I can use CIS for my needs like a toy I love your comments .. .. which had me (practically) rolling on the floor laughing!! By the way, remember @cruelsister created a easy-to-use guide for maximum security and less pop-up, I mean no one needs to read all If I need port settings etc. I look them, others settings so easy for everyone.

 

[hjlbx]

I did not read all these things but I can use CIS for my needs like a toy I love your comments .. .. which had me (practically) rolling on the floor laughing!! By the way, remember @cruelsister created a easy-to-use guide for maximum security and less pop-up, I mean no one needs to read all If I need port settings etc. I look them, others settings so easy for everyone.

Hello yigido,

I make jest (fun) of Comodo User's Manual. User Manual is nice for unknowledgeable user, but 600 pages? Lots of pictures...

CIS does not work so good on my low-end AMD system. Despite this fact, it is a very solid, respectable security software.

I think if I had Intel, then CIS would work much better for me.

 

[StriderHunterX]

I really hope not.Comodo is the one brand I trust blindly.

I remember reading about it on a gaming forum.Since I found it,I felt really secure with all it's features...and never looked back.

5 years in and my laptop has never failed to an attack(I used to download a lot of "stuff" >_>).The users that needed their PC cleaned-reconfigured,I have never seen again(and if I did,it was because of HDD failure or misc.installations)

They feel secure and they tell me so.Since I found MalwareTips(Angelic Harp sounds),I learned from CruelSister to tweak the meat of CIS-The firewall.Look at this config I finished remotely last week.....(Vista Home Premium SP2 with them latest patches)

-360 Internet Security
-MalwareBytes AntiExploit
-Zemana Antilogger(Christmas Giveaway Edition...."Angelic Harp Sounds")
-MCShield
-Comodo Firewall v8-(Cruel Sister Config....)

Google Chrome(ABP,HTTPS Everywhere,WOT)

I'm pretty sure my lady friend is more than secure,browsing her FB pages and work related duties.

Comodo's the best....Don't fail us.

PDlease keep Chromodo updated.It's pretty quick to boot....but Gmail whined that you're outdated.

 

[Piteko21]

comodo for me is synonym ofr almost impenetrable fortress, Known for its strong firewall but as antivirus is very poor
if improve their antivirus then we have a very strong suite capable of beating all competition
I hope he does not disappear...

 

[nsm0220]

guys i went though the settings they got rid of the 5 levels you can have with the sandbox

 

[Deleted member 2913]

In my opinion, Comodo Internet Security is one of the best.
Very effective solution now for average users too. Offcoz, many say autosandbox is obtrusive & when you see malware tests, you see lot of autosandbox popups but in real world scenario & specially the kind of programs average users use, rarely any program will not be in whitelists.
Any they have improved usability a lot. You will hardly find any free security software with such a strong protection & usability.

But yes, their installer is bloated & AV is not strong & definition file size is huge.

I myself use CF i.e without AV & use Internet Security config.
No other AV installed.
For me autosandbox is there for offline protection & autosandbox & cloud AV is there for online protection. I hardly work offline i.e router is always on.
No infection & FPs yet. No Comodo AV installed so light on resources too.

Users have mentioned that the new autosandbox setting in CIS 8 is weaker than previous version.
I dont think so.
What they have done is, previously there was a "safe mode" setting, under which programs already installed were treated safe & new programs were analyzed. The new setting is the same as "safe mode" i.e already installed programs are treated safe & new programs are analyzed. And once CIS is installed on the system then too it is the same as previous version i.e everything entering the system is analyzed. So nothing major new here.

One thing I would like to see in CIS. Improvement in FW i.e some kind of analyze/scanning of connections.

Antivirus is kind of not their cup of tea. I find Comodo good with softwares that doesn't require regular maintenance, softwares that works on defined rules/policy, etc... like FW, Backup, etc... And not good with softwares that require regular maintenance like AV, Web Filter, etc...

 

[hjlbx]

All anyone needs to do is mention the word "Comodo" and the thread ends up being, well, complicated...

 

[zbc1]

The answer is no.

 

[cruelsister]

Not to complicate things more (actually I love it!), regarding the sandbox settings the default setting in version 8 is Full V. The version 7 settings of Partially Limited, Limited, Restricted, and Untrusted have been thankfully trashed (actually only sort of trashed as there is a way to make a global sandbox rule to sort of use these old settings, but one would have to be rather frayed to do this).

I was ecstatic that this change was made as the old sandbox default of Partially Limited could be penetrated with ease, and even the Untrusted level was penetrated by the Critoni 2 malware, as Untrusted allowed the ransomware to subvert svchost.exe which implements the main malware functionality.

 

[SD-ahmad]

The answer is no.

And this is proof the evolution of Comodo Photos the next version

Spoiler: Picture

 

[nsm0220]

The answer is no.

And this is proof the evolution of Comodo Photos the next version

Spoiler: Picture

im sorry but comodo remove the five levels of the sandbox so how is that going to help, you got to remember that malware killed and remove comodo in that test

 

[SD-ahmad]

im sorry but comodo remove the five levels of the sandbox so how is that going to help, you got to remember that malware killed and remove comodo in that test

I did not understand what do you mean to delete levels Comodo Sandbox,You can not kill Comodo or deleted by the malware only in one case, if your computer is infected before installing Comodo

 

[cruelsister]

SD- In version 7 Comodo had various levels of virtualization, ranging from very little (Partially Limited) all the way to Fully Virtualized; it was up to the user to choose one of them. With version 8 all the sandbox levels below Full V were taken away.

NSM- check your PM.

 

[SD-ahmad]

SD- In version 7 Comodo had various levels of virtualization, ranging from very little (Partially Limited) all the way to Fully Virtualized; it was up to the user to choose one of them. With version 8 all the sandbox levels below Full V were taken away.

NSM- check your PM.

Comodo Version 7 is the best for me, but the version 8 is not so bad, and you can identify the level Sandbox restrict, or Fully Virtualized and even Fully Virtualized with the restriction at the same time

Spoiler: Picture

level Sandbox restricted such that CIS V7

New lavels only in CIS V8 "Fully Virtualized with the restriction at the same time"