ZA vs Comodv 3.0

[Wordward]

I believe CPF 3.0 may offer better protection than Zone Alarm's Triple Defense Firewall, but with the current new releases of ZA Products running better. I think Zone Alarm and ThreatFire may be a better way to go. Snap! LOL. Anyone dispute this and why?

[Diver]

Perhaps you could give us a few more details as to how you arrived at this opinion.

[Perman]

Hi, Wordward:

Comodo + ThreatFire is a good package too, in the event that you change your mind. 'cause

Comodo firewall is weighed half a pound, whereas

ZA AS(or ZA pro) ticks scale at eight ounces. :P

[Wordward]

Actually with TF added Perman, ZA weighs 4 oz. more. LOL. As far as how I arrived at this opinion Diver, I really haven't. I am looking for an excuse to install Comodo Pro 3.0 as I always liked the Firewall, and in the process wanted to quell my insatiable thirst for the v.s. threads that I have so sorely missed, and are only allowed in " the other firewall" forum. LOL.

[19monty64]

What is it that you are looking for in your FW/HIPS-arsenal? (lightness, less pop-ups, more control, etc.) Perhaps we could offer a more educated opinion based on your needs.

[Wordward]

I am a cone suer of security software my dear sir, and need nothing more than the shear enjoyment of installing and running it. Although if Comodo Pro 3.0 played well with Avast I would be be using it right now. LOL. Seriously I believe Comodo can and will be the holy grail of security for my PC, and other than an AV will not need any help with protection. However for now I just think ZA's TDF and ThreatFire along with an AV makes a slightly better choice for ones PC security needs.

[19monty64]

You could try Comodo (with D+) with AntiVir, (to avoid the Avast-issues) and drop TF completely. Just to scratch yer itch. Ya never know...

[Coolio10]

{QUOTE-> You could try Comodo (with D+) with AntiVir, (to avoid the Avast-issues) and drop TF completely. Just to scratch yer itch. Ya never know... <-QUOTE}
Or give Comodo time for bugfixing.

[Wordward]

Avira PE? Good idea 19monty64. It's time for me to try all the AntVirus Programs again anyway. LOL. I think Comodo Pro 3.0 is running decent on most PC's and I wouldn't mind installing it, but I do really hate to give up Avast at this time. Besides I'm not sure Avira PE is quite as good at detection as the Premium version is, and as a result it may be a little closer to that of Avast. Plus the Avast voice enhanced update and spinning System Tray Icon just thrills me. Which reminds me. It looks like the Comodo System Tray Icon may have changed a little bit. Is this true? Hey Coolio. I will give Comodo a little more time before installing, and nice to hear from you.

[19monty64]

{QUOTE-> Or give Comodo time for bugfixing. <-QUOTE}
I'm giving it a week or two also, just to increase my odds of it working good the first time. But seriously Wordward, why haven't you given AVG/AV a shot lately???

[Wordward]

I was late in posting my last reply, but in all seriousness I'm not that thrilled with the results of AVG AS in the AV Comparitives Pro Active/ Retrospective Tests, and I'm sure even AVG Pro AV would fair worse. Avast however, while not on the scale of Avira did quite well in those tests and even though both were Professional versions used, I believe that Avast Home is closer to Avast Pro than Avira PE is to Avira PP. Wow that was a lot of typing. LOL.

[rhuds13]

Avast Pro and Home both same as far as detections. Only really differ in cosmetics and extra controls in Pro.

[CoolWebSearch]

{QUOTE-> I believe CPF 3.0 may offer better protection than Zone Alarm's Triple Defense Firewall, but with the current new releases of ZA Products running better. I think Zone Alarm and ThreatFire may be a better way to go. Snap! LOL. Anyone dispute this and why? <-QUOTE}

I simply don't think Comodo 3.0 has greater protection than ZA's triple defense firewall,I simply don't.
Friend told me that his ZA blocked rootkit's attempt to access the Internet on his computer-now the question is how is that possible since rootkits are supposed to be 100% stealth/invisible?

It's simple, really it is. ZA couldn't "see" rootkit's attempt to access the Internet,but however there is no malware that can hide IP adress on which it tries to contact with,that's how he blocked rootkit's attempt to access the Internet.
Basically,ZA detected very strange IP adress,and since he never saw this IP address before,he simply blocked it-it looks like leak-tests are NOT that important,like many people think they are.
However,I must say he is extremely experienced in computers,so I guess he simply knew what was he doing.

[Perman]

Hi,

I believe that your friend has told you the FACT. The fact that his ZA has blocked a rootkit's behaviour. But...

He did not tell the whole TRUTH. The truth that whether he has conduct or experienced the very same situation with Comodo firewall or even any other firewall applications. Perhaps....

Comodo can perform the same task or even better ? TAKE CARE.

[the insider]

Perman,

you seem to me someone who knows Comodo v3 very well ? In that case can you help me out ?

In the 2.4 version every prog which was blocked/allowed/ask was visible in one screen. I (as layman) was able to change these setting in a second... now I have 2 major problems with the v3
1 : I find also a look a like screen but not all of the progs are there but they are running even so ! What should I do in order to see every prog/process ???
2. some progs connect to internet without asking me permission (probably because they belong to "known/safe" progs ?) but I don't want this kind of automation I want to stay in control !

Like I stated before : v3 is for pro's not for the common folk but still I want to give it a try :-\

[Perman]

Hi, the insider:

Thanks for your interest.

I am not an expert of firewall nor of any sort, rather a layman just like you, therefore I assume that I can speak to with the SAME language.

I used v2x briefly before, but no luck, this v.3 final is my first encounter with CFP since then. I found this version is a frog-leap from earlier versions, moreover, IMO, it has since set a new higher standard for all firewall applications days/months to come.

I would install v.3 and go thru all features carefully. The answer to your #1 question could be found in Defense+ section(view active process list), the solution to #2 question can also be located in Summary section(network defense).

I have been hoping( right word ?) from one firewall to the other for the last three months; mcafee>Sunbelt kerio>ZA AS> now CFP. I can say to myself now that the lengthy search could well be ended right here with CFP v.3. Six months from now? who knows, perhaps something very appealing will pop up on the horizon. Take care.

[alex_s]

{QUOTE-> Hi, the insider:
it has since set a new higher standard for all firewall applications days/months to come.
<-QUOTE}Some briefe tests show that it is too early to be so optimictic.

1.) Comodo v3 failed to prevent SSS to shutdown system.
2.) Comodo v3 allowed spt.exe to kill its GUI with at least two different methods
3.) Comodo v3 failed to stop regtest.exe.

While there is a lot of the Firewalls and HIPS that treat abovmetioned test absolutely correctly, it is too early to say about "new higher standard for all".

And these were just "quick tests" with well known simulators. What about real malware ?

Yes, due to a lot of popups Comodo makes a feeling it is very secure. But .. a lot of popus tells nothing except that Comodo alerting system is not optimal and produces a lot of the false positives.

[Menorcaman]

{QUOTE-> As far as how I arrived at this opinion Diver, I really haven't. I am looking for an excuse to install Comodo Pro 3.0 as I always liked the Firewall, and in the process wanted to quell my insatiable thirst for the v.s. threads that I have so sorely missed, and are only allowed in " the other firewall" forum. LOL. <-QUOTE}No so. Any thread that degenerates into unsubstantiated A versus B opinions brings nothing of value to these forums and invariably leads to the usual fanboy war. In which case the thread will likely be closed, no matter what the subject.

If you really can't do without your regular fix of A vs B type threads then perhaps you should visit some of the many less technically orientated sites. There sure are enough of them out there. :gack:

Regards

Menorcaman

[Perman]

Hi, alex s:

Thanks for your valuable input, and I do respect your expertise, but just wonder....

Those simulators you used/mentioned, I would assume, are known to firewall experts, including folks at Comodo, just wonder that have they indeed conducted such tests at all,and what are their results.

The simulators, of course, are designed by experts for evaluation purposes, but how far are they from the real, nothing but real malwares ? by inches or miles ? If those Labs reports concerning cancer causing food (results from lab animals) can not change ordinary folks' eating habits, IMHO, how powerful would these tests of yours be in average joes/janes' (majority of comodo fw users) mind. Your tests have their merits, but in reality, IMO, may possess limited value to general folks. Take care.

[Wordward]

I have been to the Avast Forum, and it seems the intellect displayed in the various posts there can differentiate between having a good old debate about A or B and a war. Look in this thread though and the information that has been given. No war here and the same intellect so far. maybe people just need to be nicer in the debates of which product "may" offer better stability and protection and why. I have yet to install Comodo, only because of what I have read here and in the other Comodo thread, and not because I truly think ZA is superior. I am very close though, because I also have an insatiable thirst to try new Security Programs. LOL. Take care my friend.

[feniks]

{QUOTE-> Hi, alex s:

Thanks for your valuable input, and I do respect your expertise, but just wonder....

Those simulators you used/mentioned, I would assume, are known to firewall experts, including folks at Comodo, just wonder that have they indeed conducted such tests at all,and what are their results.

The simulators, of course, are designed by experts for evaluation purposes, but how far are they from the real, nothing but real malwares ? by inches or miles ? If those Labs reports concerning cancer causing food (results from lab animals) can not change ordinary folks' eating habits, IMHO, how powerful would these tests of yours be in average joes/janes' (majority of comodo fw users) mind. Your tests have their merits, but in reality, IMO, may possess limited value to general folks. Take care. <-QUOTE}

Why install software which is helpless on well known basic simulation of how malware works?

What about more sophisticated malware tricks, will be CF deal with them better than with basic well known simulations?

By the way I install yesterday CF with default and immediately after try starting The Bat! (emails) 100% cpu load, after reboot I turn off defence+ same results. I think is not polished yet to work at all for me, then how I can trust in its protection?

[19monty64]

Their A vs B debates were sometimes based only on what they had read or only given 5-10 min. trials w/out asking questions or reading help-files. Nothing wrong with comparing products strengths/weaknesses, as here, most members give an app. a proper trial and ask a lot of questions for help. (eh,Wordward?) Over-all, I think the personal attacks and product-flaming is much less here as "healthy" debate rules. I've noticed a decrease in closed threads lately, haven't y'all?
P.S.-Happy Thanksgiving y'all (did I say that right?) Football be berry, berry good to me...can't wait for kick off & tur-duc-ken :thumb: :thumb: even though its not a holiday here!!!

[Perman]

Hi,
Speaking of those well-known (whether basic or advanced) test simulators, I deeply doubt that Comodo folks would have rolled out this version with those flaws, perhaps, just a wild guess, they may have different results or innovative interpretations to these results. As I have said earlier these test results have their own high merits, but when they are played into some folks' mind, they may seem not to be so.

Prior to adopting any new application, it has to be accepted by your existing pc configurations/set up, if it fails, then no obligation to keep it or even ask it to stay making adjustments. If Comodo v3 does not fit yours, then move on to next, yes the next.. Just look at me, I have been hopping from one to the other until now.... Be happy.

[feniks]

{QUOTE-> Hi,
Speaking of those well-known (whether basic or advanced) test simulators, I deeply doubt that Comodo folks would have rolled out this version with those flaws, perhaps, just a wild guess, they may have different results or innovative interpretations to these results. As I have said earlier these test results have their own high merits, but when they are played into some folks' mind, they may seem not to be so.

Prior to adopting any new application, it has to be accepted by your existing pc configurations/set up, if it fails, then no obligation to keep it or even ask it to stay making adjustments. If Comodo v3 does not fit yours, then move on to next, yes the next.. Just look at me, I have been hopping from one to the other until now.... Be happy. <-QUOTE}

I fully agree with you, maybe it is my english. :-[ (I did not want pass any judgement on CF which I think is top player here)

I just wanted to say that everybody has right to feel and decide on some criteria which are important to them.

So I do not try to say that Comodo is bad firewall I just try to say that alex_s has his point, and I put my example with software conflict but that just my case - there may be millions satisfied users of CF.

And there is no perfect software yet which have everything for everybody just perfect. That is the base from where I said that.

I know my english is killing me and we do not know each other well so nothing is perfect in my communication either. Maybe many will not like to install and use me for discussion matter. ;) ;D .

EDIT: I am sure that Comodo makers had to decide what are their priorities and maybe they just right and maybe they are very successful in achieving that but there will not be everything for everybody.

[CoolWebSearch]

{QUOTE-> Hi,

I believe that your friend has told you the FACT. The fact that his ZA has blocked a rootkit's behaviour. But...

He did not tell the whole TRUTH. The truth that whether he has conduct or experienced the very same situation with Comodo firewall or even any other firewall applications. Perhaps....

Comodo can perform the same task or even better ? TAKE CARE. <-QUOTE}

Hi,Perman,I appreciate your answer.
I've tried almost any software firewall.
It seems to me that reviews of each and every firewall and Internet Security suites depends how you test them.Basically I'm planning to send e-mail to Neil
Rubenking to test every security suite on the maximum possible protection,than we will see how good each firewall really is,because almost every firewall and Internet Security Suite on default gives average or less than average success.
I quite remember when was such last testing by the end of 2005(I think) and Outpost Pro was the winner on default protection level settings,but ZA was the winner on the maximum protection level settings.
So,I think these kinds of tests should always be done.
If you want good example,take Kaspersky Internet Security Suite 7.0 review-it's protection against all kinds of malware on default-level was not very good,however when Neil Rubenking tweaked it to the maximum level,it basically stopped almost all malware,as well detecting and removing malware samples.

Cheers!

[alex_s]

{QUOTE->
If you want good example,take Kaspersky Internet Security Suite 7.0 review-it's protection against all kinds of malware on default-level was not very good,however when Neil Rubenking tweaked it to the maximum level,it basically stopped almost all malware,as well detecting and removing malware samples.Cheers! <-QUOTE}

The main problem with security software is the maximum level protection is, yes, quite safe, but with maximum level of protection it goes to be almost unusable, either too slow or annoying with the popups that you drop to read after some time. But then you risk to miss the only popup you installed a program for when its time comes :)

[CoolWebSearch]

{QUOTE-> Hi,

I believe that your friend has told you the FACT. The fact that his ZA has blocked a rootkit's behaviour. But...

He did not tell the whole TRUTH. The truth that whether he has conduct or experienced the very same situation with Comodo firewall or even any other firewall applications. Perhaps....

Comodo can perform the same task or even better ? TAKE CARE. <-QUOTE}

Well,I forgot to tell one thing about ZA Pro.Newer versions of ZA Pro do stop rootkits even without asking.
One example:
Although a rootkit uses stealth tools to keep Windows from detecting its identity using Task Manager or any other tool, an outgoing IP call has to come from somewhere. The fact that the call was made is testament to the identity of a program somewhere on the system; and if ZoneAlarm somehow can't identify and "see" any malware program, then it won't let the call go through anyway-basically,if an malware wants to connect to the Internet on the unknown IP adress,it will stop malwares without the user interference-ZA Pro can't see rootkit,but can see IP adress-newer versions automatically block invisible program's attempt to the Internet,because ZA Pro can't see it.

The same thing goes for program behavior-ZA has the safelist over 100 000 applications and database of 30 different behaviours and unlike Comodo-ZA does remember,that's why ZA has fewer pop-ups than Comodo.

If an completely invisible application wants to modify other programs,ZA will automatically block-however, please notice that ZA Pro itself will not "see" the invisible rootkit/malware, but it will see the change of this known program and ask you or block it, it really depends how did you configure it-this is an indirect way how can you beat rootkits modifying your programs inside your computer-ZA Pro can't see rootkits-and since ZA Pro can't see rootkits it will automatically block their influence and change on all other computer programs because, by default, when ZA Pro detects a change in an computer program and if ZA Pro can't see malware that is trying to modify computer's own programs/files, than ZA Pro will automatically block it from dangerous modification.

Cheers!