Why Comodo programmer's not develop heuristic for phishing sites ?

[Tony Cole]

Why Comodo programmer's not develop heuristic for phishing sites ?

This I believe sums up everything Comodo really stands for, and shows just how much Melih cares about user data protection:

Melih:

i would like to focus the discussion...there are many names we are throwing around like web filtering etc....
there are 2 main things to protect

1)user's computer from infection
2)user's data from falling into wrong hands

CIS is designed to do 1.

The correct answer from Morphiusz:

That is correct, Melih. I understand that. CIS is designed to prevent infection and it does it brilliantly.

However, protecting sensitive user's data (eg from phishing attack) is also part of online security. Is comodo going to offer any solution to do this or is it going to specialize in protecting computer only?

So, there website malware protection is awful, but even worse Melih and Comodo would not care if your bank account was hacked and money stolen – I have removed it, I’m just sorry I gave it another chance. Total crap…

You can read more (and laugh) at Melih trying to argue his case here:

https://forums.comodo.com/news-anno...p-heuristic-for-phishing-sites-t111514.0.html

P.S. the title is not mine, and belongs to another Comodo user: Henrique - RJ

 

[souhrid]

One thing becomes clear here, if comodo really want to improve they should throw out melih.

 

[Deleted member 178]

One thing becomes clear here, if comodo really want to improve they should throw out melih.

oh how do you read my mind !!!!

 

[FleischmannTV]

Phishing protection is sort of fake in all products anyway. And now excuse me, because I have to verify my paypal credentials on that website from the e-mail link, because my internet security didn't flag it as a phishing site, so it has to be legit. These days I have to do a lot of account verifications from e-mail links and I am fully confident my internet security will protect me. I just don't understand why I have to verify my paypal account dozens of times every day.

 

[Enju]

Phishing protection is sort of fake in all products anyway. And now excuse me, because I have to verify my paypal credentials on that website from the e-mail link, because my internet security didn't flag it as a phishing site, so it has to be legit. These days I have to do a lot of account verifications from e-mail links and I am fully confident my internet security will protect me. I just don't understand why I have to verify my paypal account dozens of times every day.

Don't forget to include your online banking account and the corresponding TAN, so they can verify that this account really belongs to you!
But I agree completely, phishing protection is a pseudo feature which lulls the users into a false sense of security. The only real phishing protection is your wit, same goes for all those fancy "privacy protection" features.

 

[Deleted member 2913]

I too think browsers like Chrome gives good protection against phishing. And most phishing sites is live for short time. And nowadays banks too takes extra precaution & couple steps are involved for logging, etc. With little common sense phishing could be avoided to a good extent. A good security is always welcome.

And Comodo WebShield is just a showpiece in the GUI. Its not updated for days-weeks. Its very poor & non-existent. Though WebShield could be used for other purpose too. But is total failure in the main job.

 

[Piteko21]

If comodo had a better web filter, a web filter, (I do not consider it a web filter) - that would bring more consistency and solidity to the product as a whole, a protection to safely surf the web. Internet Security must bring Firewall, antivirus with web shield, and in some cases Hips.
I agree with that @yesnoo, many banks have their protections but are not enough.
the real danger is even more in people with few knowledge who are fooled by a false page.They do not know to distinguish phishing pages of real pages.
At this point, comodo internet security program should integrate an effective web protection. Only has a very good firewall however this nowadays is not enough for most users.
I believe that these web protections are still needed especially for people with fewer skills to learn to escape a fraud.
especially for those who do not care much about having good practices on the Internet and just trust your antivirus. Everyone deserves to be protected.
Mostly, everyone should learn how to safely surf the internet, such as learning to drive a car.

 

[porkpiehat]

I honestly don't see the problem, especially with add-ons like Bitdefender Traffic Light, etc, and common sense... we all know the dangers of phishing sites, and nothing is 100% foolproof.... as a frontline protection Comodo does it for me, and any shortcomings are strengthened by other means... there are enough products out there to cover most of the bases... but for me, Comodo is the foundation that my security is built around.... for instance, if you receive an email from TSB requesting credit card info, and the link ends in 'co.za' let's say, are you going to trust it if nothing pops up and alerts you?

 

[Tony Cole]

Kaspersky offers phishing protection, and the additional protection for online banking. With fraud now increasing we need such protection. I really think Melih doesn't have a clue, may be if he succumbed to financial fraud, or ID theft he would think differently. He should include this with the Comodo guarantee.

 

[jamescv7]

Thoughts:

1) Surely its not their forte but that's totally impossible cause finding those phishing sites are same to add samples for processing of signatures.

2) Division of work must happen to make the program capable to detect any time of threats.

3) The purpose of such security company is to gather a lot of information where other fail to do so, therefore its not an excuse to leave that easily.

4) Phishing are so easy to gather where so many volunteered websites harvest blacklist sites everyday.

 

[Tony Cole]

The points made by Piteko21 are 100% correct, today with the likes of money laundering, ID theft and the ability of cyber criminals to access online bank accounts, the security industry needs to rally round and do their part, working with law enforcement to tackle and hit the criminals hard. That’s why I pay a yearly subscription, as a rule of thumb most of us have come to expect that kind of protection. Comodo’s argument (Melih) is poor, and just shows he does not have a clue about modern security, keeping a clean pc clean is one thing, there is a whole criminal ecosystem in the IT world, and digital security is a part of the malware problem. Rootkits, Trojans encased in sandboxes is not the only answer. I’m afraid Nico@FMA has been right from the very start, maybe he should replace Melih.

Time will be the ultimate teller, and in this harsh ever evolving cyber environment we now live in (just like evolution “only the best survive,”) maybe that’s why Kaspersky, avast! and Bitdefender have so many customers – you never see Eugene on Kaspersky’s forums trying to argue with customers; really, isn’t the customer (who keeps your business afloat) always right..?

 

[thepierrezou]

Thanks for this post. I just show what i was thinking : comodo is a real joke and no one bug will be fixed until 400 000 years. Nice !!

 

[Deleted member 2913]

The points made by Piteko21 are 100% correct, today with the likes of money laundering, ID theft and the ability of cyber criminals to access online bank accounts, the security industry needs to rally round and do their part, working with law enforcement to tackle and hit the criminals hard. That’s why I pay a yearly subscription, as a rule of thumb most of us have come to expect that kind of protection. Comodo’s argument (Melih) is poor, and just shows he does not have a clue about modern security, keeping a clean pc clean is one thing, there is a whole criminal ecosystem in the IT world, and digital security is a part of the malware problem. Rootkits, Trojans encased in sandboxes is not the only answer. I’m afraid Nico@FMA has been right from the very start, maybe he should replace Melih.

Time will be the ultimate teller, and in this harsh ever evolving cyber environment we now live in (just like evolution “only the best survive,”) maybe that’s why Kaspersky, avast! and Bitdefender have so many customers – you never see Eugene on Kaspersky’s forums trying to argue with customers; really, isn’t the customer (who keeps your business afloat) always right..?

Kaspersky & Bitdefender are good with phishing & overall protection.
Avast is like Comodo, very poor phishing protection...WebShield & Avast Online Shield both are very poor in phishing protection.

In free AV scene no products with good phishing protection except Bd free but users find it buggy.
Other free AVs...either no phising protection or very poor phishing protection or give phishing protection with additional toolbars.

Actually not many products provide excellent protection when it comes to data protection. Webshield is fine but thats not the only way data could be stolen. Malware installed, etc... could transmit data.

So I would say some are good with malware protection but poor web protection, some good with web protection but not so good malware protection, some provide good overall protection.

When it comes to data protection no product with solid data protection. Never used kaspersky but think its one product that has excellent layers providing excellent protection. Not forgetting no products can provide 100% protection.

So Comodo has its weaknesses & so does others with data protection, etc...