Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Evjl&amp;#039;s Rain" data-source="post: 713711" data-attributes="member: 51905">hi, thank you for tagging meI made this video because when I was testing CCAV with petya, it failed unexpectedly. That&#039;s why I decided to make a video to let everyone know about this issue. After a month or something, comodo totally fixed itin the end, CCAV is inferior to CF because it doesn&#039;t use hardware virtualization. CCAV&#039;s sandbox is similar to sandboxie (user-hook)however, using the default settings in CCAV is better than CF because CCAV&#039;s default sandbox config is similar to Proactive profile in CF while CF&#039;s default profile has some rules to reduce FP rate (3-day old files, come from intranet,... I recall)CCAV is clearly better than CF for average users who just install and forget and they don&#039;t know about CS&#039;s CF configComodo admitted the problem in CCAV so they fixed it unless they would have ignored it</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Evjl's Rain, post: 713711, member: 51905"] hi, thank you for tagging me I made this video because when I was testing CCAV with petya, it failed unexpectedly. That's why I decided to make a video to let everyone know about this issue. After a month or something, comodo totally fixed it in the end, CCAV is inferior to CF because it doesn't use hardware virtualization. CCAV's sandbox is similar to sandboxie (user-hook) however, using the default settings in CCAV is better than CF because CCAV's default sandbox config is similar to Proactive profile in CF while CF's default profile has some rules to reduce FP rate (3-day old files, come from intranet,... I recall) CCAV is clearly better than CF for average users who just install and forget and they don't know about CS's CF config Comodo admitted the problem in CCAV so they fixed it unless they would have ignored it [/QUOTE]

Verification