question about Comodo Antivirus

[_ab]

Hi,

I was using Antivir (aka Avira) for years, i had to remove it due to problems with SSM (thanks to Aviras policy of turning on "keylogger protection" by default after updating, causing blue screens, besides the fact, that updating didn´t work properly).

Now i´m testing CAVS Beta. Here are the two questions: what do you think about CAVS? besides of it i´m also using BoClean, SSM & Sandboxie. I turned off the HIPS in CAVS, since i´m using SSM Free. Do you think, it makes any sense in running another HIPS (like that in CAVS) alongside SSM?

Please note: since i don´t believe in the "conspiracy" oder "spyware" theory regarding Comodo, don´t discuss this here! ;)

[solcroft]

The "HIPS" in Comodo isn't a HIPS at all, just an application access control function. You can turn it off safely, SSM will provide much more coverage than Comodo's "HIPS" does.

Last I tested it, Comodo had a quirky bug that caused its realtime scanner to miss malware that it does have signatures for and the ondemand scan will detect, not sure if it's been fixed yet.

[the Tester]

What do I think about Comodo antivirus?
I'd wait a while.See how/if it improves over time before depending on it.
Just my opinion.

[WSFuser]

I think Comodo AV still has maturing/improving to do and as solcroft has said, SSM (or other HIPS) would do a better job.

[_ab]

{QUOTE-> The "HIPS" in Comodo isn't a HIPS at all, just an application access control function. You can turn it off safely, SSM will provide much more coverage than Comodo's "HIPS" does.
<-QUOTE}

Yeah, i´ll leave it off then.


{QUOTE->
Last I tested it, Comodo had a quirky bug that caused its realtime scanner to miss malware that it does have signatures for and the ondemand scan will detect, not sure if it's been fixed yet. <-QUOTE}

Well, i have BoCleaner & SSM, so i can afford waiting for a better version of CAVS. I´d like to use a free anti virus, & i had too much troulbe with Avira, so i will use CAVS now.

[C.S.J]

urrrggh comodo, thats what i think about it :)

[solcroft]

In all seriousness, if you must use a free AV, I'd consider other options if I were you: AVG, avast!, or the free McAfee package from AOL. Heck, even PC Tools' free AV has won a VB100% award before, at the very least.

[_ab]

{QUOTE-> In all seriousness, if you must use a free AV, I'd consider other options if I were you: AVG, avast!, or the free McAfee package from AOL. Heck, even PC Tools' free AV has won a VB100% award before, at the very least. <-QUOTE}

yeah, thx. I replaced it now with AVG Free.

[The One]

They have to keep to what they are good at and that's the firewall. They have to leave the av part to the good ones

[kinwolf]

CAVS is still in beta and really should not be used as primary or even secondary scanner right now beside for testing purpose. It's detection rate stands at about 40% from the last test I saw and while they keep improving their detection engine and add signatures, it still has a way to go.

If all you need is a good on-demand secondary scanner for free, you can use any of the web based scanner of NOD32, Bitdefender, Kaspersky, Trend or others.

If you need an on-access shield then go with AVG since avira is causing you problem, but don't think CAVS will be an effective protection, right now it's not.

Kin

[JamesFrance]

Hi C.S.J,

As someone using Comodo antivirus, I read your post with interest.

With it still being a beta I do online scans to check. I read about your Dr Web Cure it and decided to give it a try. It didn't find anything of course, but did generate a popup trying to sell your AV, so I am not surprised you are not too happy about Comodo giving us pensioners free security.

[kinwolf]

{QUOTE-> Hi C.S.J,

As someone using Comodo antivirus, I read your post with interest.

With it still being a beta I do online scans to check. I read about your Dr Web Cure it and decided to give it a try. It didn't find anything of course, but did generate a popup trying to sell your AV, so I am not surprised you are not too happy about Comodo giving us pensioners free security. <-QUOTE}

Free(and good) security is always great, and Comodo firewall is one of the best, bu their AV detection rate is really not good right now so that's why it shouldn't be used as a primary AV IMO, plus being still beta is another reason. Once a final release is made and it's detection rate is proven to be good,then I'm sure alot of people will finally support it.

Kin

[C.S.J]

{QUOTE-> Hi C.S.J,

As someone using Comodo antivirus, I read your post with interest.

With it still being a beta I do online scans to check. I read about your Dr Web Cure it and decided to give it a try. It didn't find anything of course, but did generate a popup trying to sell your AV, so I am not surprised you are not too happy about Comodo giving us pensioners free security. <-QUOTE}
well i was told to respect the elders, but with comments like that, you aint getting any ;)

[Peter2150]

Please lets stay on topic.

[Peter2150]

Off topic posts with comments about posters removed. Please stay on topic and not make comments about posters.

Thank you

Pete

[kenshi]

I've recently uninstalled CAV from my system because it caused Trillian Pro to eradicate my connection profiles to all my IM's (Yahoo, MSN, AOL, etc.). The problems seems to be with the Email Scanner and I heard this has happened with another AV product. Since I love Trillian, I decided that CAV had to go and I wrote of this bug in the Comodo Forums about 2 weeks ago. They are still working on it.

Outside of that I think their Firewall product is very good and I do hope they can fix this problem with CAV. However I do admit that AV is something I don't want to skimp out on and thus for the time being I am using the freeware version of AVG which can be annoying unless you purchase it. I might end up testing Blink as a total solution or purchasing NOD32.

[GES/POR]

If tomorrow av test org or avc would show new detection numbers for cav on par with many others very few would bash it today. In a layered security setup such as yours it is just fine. Id say it would make even a better choice then avg. Why? Avg is one of the easiest av s for malware to bypass. Proof? Have a look at your neighbours pc. Avg with firefox is safe? Think again. Seen to many pc s compromised in such a horrible way i cant keep my mouth shut about it.

[solcroft]

{QUOTE-> If tomorrow av test org or avc would show new detection numbers for cav on par with many others very few would bash it today. <-QUOTE}
True.

The problem is that you're missing a very critical point. I wonder if you can spot what it is. ;D

[GES/POR]

No test results tomorrow?

For a new free av cav impressed me and i think only few here could achieve the same.

Personally i welcome every serious fight against malware.

[quadrophonic]

{QUOTE-> Avg is one of the easiest av s for malware to bypass. <-QUOTE}

Would you recommend the free Antivir PE Classic instead, even though it doesn't have the malware detection of Antivir Premium, or go the Avast route, AOL McAfee, or a free six month trial of F-secure 2006 as mentioned on another thread?

I was thinking of buying Kaspersky AV 6 for free after rebate until I read the thread about the chkdsk problem.

[rdsu]

Stay with AntiVir ;)

CAVS still needs a lot of work and time, to can be compared with AntiVir or other top AV...

[GES/POR]

{QUOTE-> Would you recommend the free Antivir PE Classic instead, even though it doesn't have the malware detection of Antivir Premium, or go the Avast route, AOL McAfee, or a free six month trial of F-secure 2006 as mentioned on another thread?

I was thinking of buying Kaspersky AV 6 for free after rebate until I read the thread about the chkdsk problem. <-QUOTE}

I went with Antivir Premium and as soon as i get from holiday i will give the suite and some other products a run.

[Pedro]

As soon as i saw 6 months free for Premium, i joined the wagon too. :)
Free versions, i don't know, i think i would stay with Avast!

[GES/POR]

After cleanup i install avira classic, boclean and sas free. Is lighter and more effective combo then just avast.

[JamesFrance]

I was very happy with Avast before changing it for CAV. I wouldn't have done that without BOClean to support it and have the CAV HIPS turned off as I also am using CPF beta. If I get a problem I know that good support is available on their forum and they have always been able to help when necessary.

[xandros]

comodo antivirus its a joke
its new program its need time to be good program

so try another antivirus
kaspersky internet security
nod32
avira antivir premum

good luck

[kenshi]

As I said earlier, I was a 2 time CAV user but was forced to uninstall it because it would consistently wipe out my Trillian Pro settings - I've submitted this as a bug.

Last night I was at a magazine store which sold a British publication called PC Utilities and they had a CAV review. While they rated it 4 out of 5 stars, they do caution the reader that CAV is still in beta and has not been submitted or certified by any reviewing body (i.e. http://www.av-comparatives.org/) and instead recommend you use one such as AVG or Avast.

I am looking forward to the day when they can fix this problem with Trillian and get certification. I've used their firewall software and did like it. For the time being I am using the 6 month free AntiVir and I may end up making this my permanent AV.

[solcroft]

I noticed Comodo had released a new beta version, which I downloaded and tried this afternoon.

The detection rates are still as bad as ever. Also, the so-called "HIPS" was still flagging programs that I'd submitted to Comodo a few months ago when I tested an earlier version of CAVS. Apparently Comodo does absolutely nothing with submitted files but sit back and relax, because the much-touted so-called "HIPS" component is still nothing but a useless piece of junk that flags a whole bunch of legitimate programs and then wants me to upload all those ~60mb of data to Comodo. No way.

Lousy detection rates, an overrated "HIPS" and a protection ideology that obviously doesn't work. The Comodo CEO claimed months ago that they were working to extend their whitelist so as to reduce the "HIPS" FPs, apparently the result of their work is that people have to upload megabytes of data and whitelist a whole bunch of programs by themselves. I'd still stay the hell away from this one, at least for the time being.

[JamesFrance]

I don't think you can expect much improvement from CAVS 2. The HIPS in that has been made obsolete by the one in the CPF 3 beta. All they are doing now is updating the database, cause all the effort is going into CAVS 3 which is getting closer. Better to wait for that before passing judgement.

[solcroft]

{QUOTE-> I don't think you can expect much improvement from CAVS 2. The HIPS in that has been made obsolete by the one in the CPF 3 beta. All they are doing now is updating the database, cause all the effort is going into CAVS 3 which is getting closer. Better to wait for that before passing judgement. <-QUOTE}
I thought we were discussing the antivirus here. :-\

The firewall is somewhat too bloated for my liking as well, and I don't want or need a HIPS either.

[JamesFrance]

So that is why I said to wait for CAVS 3

[solcroft]

My mistake, I thought you said wait for CPF v3.

Though my current beef with CAVS is the database updates... or rather, the lack thereof. With such invasive digging and requesting of files from users' systems, one would expect they've built up a comprehensive black/whitelist by now. For all the inconvenience CAVS users went through, I see no tangible results from Comodo.

[twl845]

{QUOTE-> Hi,

I was using Antivir (aka Avira) for years, i had to remove it due to problems with SSM (thanks to Aviras policy of turning on "keylogger protection" by default after updating, causing blue screens, besides the fact, that updating didn´t work properly).

Now i´m testing CAVS Beta. Here are the two questions: what do you think about CAVS? besides of it i´m also using BoClean, SSM & Sandboxie. I turned off the HIPS in CAVS, since i´m using SSM Free. Do you think, it makes any sense in running another HIPS (like that in CAVS) alongside SSM?

Please note: since i don´t believe in the "conspiracy" oder "spyware" theory regarding Comodo, don´t discuss this here! ;) <-QUOTE}
I installed CAVS on my Daughters computer a few months ago and also disabled the HIPS. She isn't computer literate, and the pop ups were a pain. So far it has been working fine, updating definitions and humming away. I am using BOClean on my computer, along with Comodo FW, NOD32, and SAS Pro. No problems.:)

[JamesFrance]

{QUOTE->

Though my current beef with CAVS is the database updates... or rather, the lack thereof. <-QUOTE}

Hi solcroft,

I happened to note the number of viruses in the list on 3rd September. Since then there has been an increase of 1600 to 261174 and I see at least one update every day.

I don't know how this would compare with others, but a quick look at Kaspersky shows 398862, so it is a long way short of that.

[C.S.J]

{QUOTE-> Hi solcroft,

I happened to note the number of viruses in the list on 3rd September. Since then there has been an increase of 1600 to 261174 and I see at least one update every day.

I don't know how this would compare with others, but a quick look at Kaspersky shows 398862, so it is a long way short of that. <-QUOTE}
signature count means absolutely nothing

[solcroft]

{QUOTE-> Hi solcroft,

I happened to note the number of viruses in the list on 3rd September. Since then there has been an increase of 1600 to 261174 and I see at least one update every day.

I don't know how this would compare with others, but a quick look at Kaspersky shows 398862, so it is a long way short of that. <-QUOTE}
Hi,

The problem with signatures is that it isn't as simple as counting the numbers. Many vendors have generic detection signatures that can catch multiple variants with only one string - it shows quality, as opposed to quantity. Take Avira for example, who has over 1000k+ signatures and yet only scores marginally better than KAV's 390k in AVC tests, because the unpacking support of Avira is absolutely horrible and they need to add signatures for most repacked variants. Or take Symantec with only ~73k signatures, yet beat even KAV in the latest test. It displays a powerful scanning engine and excellent signatures on the vendor's part, and you don't judge how much a scanner can detect based on how man signatures it has.

Just so you know, Comodo scored around 40% the last time AVC tested it. That's a damn long way to go, since the top dogs consistently score more than 90% in a test of more than 800k pieces of malware.

[JamesFrance]

Thanks solcroft, I am here to learn.:) I knew about those test results and would certainly not suggest using it to someone else. There have been many updates since February, but of course it is hard to know what effect they have had. I am staying on board waiting for CAVS 3, but would not rely on it alone.

C.S.J I was just replying to the mention of a lack of updates, whether the count means anything is not relevant to that, but thankyou for your input.