Comodo Leaktest

[Ranget]

Test Methodology :
Comodo Leaktest V1.1.0.3
Test machine OS XP Sp3 x86 unpatched
every security software Got tested individually by it self with no other software
Windows Firewall is On by default not if got disabled by the security suite
Testing done in VMware v8

Testing took about two days without getting enough sleep
i would have tested more but My internet connection a bit slow to download
various security suits

anyway

Score 	Program	Note
20/340	Nod32 smart security v5.0.94.0	
T	kaspersky internet security	terminated the excution
200/340	kaspersky internet security  (safe Run)	Run in kaspersky sandbox
10/340	Xp Sp3 no security  x86	
T	zemana antilogger 	terminated the excution
10/340	winpatrol Free	
T	Threat fire  free	terminated the excution
270/340	spyshelter Free	very depending on user decision 
20/340	snoopfree	
180/340	sandboxie free default settings 	
20/330	Returnil  2011 Trial    Virtual Mode Off	detected a dll wich made the test from 330 not from 340
50/330	Returnil  2011 Trial    Virtual Mode On	
70/340	Samurau Hips v2.7	
340/340	Online armor Free	very depending on user decision 
340/340	Online armor Free  ( Run safe )	
310/340	Malware defender (Normal Mode)	default rules  + very depending on user decision 
10/340	Malware defender (Learning  Mode)	
290/340	Malware defender (Silent Mode)	
70/340	Storm shield   	activated realtime protection 
30/340	Geswall 2.9.1	default rules 
170/340	Geswall 2.9.1   (isolated Program)	
10/340	Kingsoft pc doctor 2.8.1.41	
90/340	xyvos antivirus 1.5.0.0	
20/340	avast Free antivirus v6	
20/340	avast Pro antivirus v6 trial 	
160/340	avast Pro antivirus v6 trial  SandBox	
20/340	avast Internet security 6 Trial 	
160/340	avast Internet security 6 Trial  SandBox	
70/340	avira Free Antivirus 2012	
70/340	avira Internet security 2012 Trial 	
30/340	Lavasoft Adaware free	
30/330	Spyware terminator 2012 Free 	
20/340	spybot s&d   2 beta 4	
50/340	Clamwin 0.95.2	
20/340	Defense Wall default 	
310/340  Defense Wall Run as Untrusted 
330/340  Defense Wall + Firewall Run as Untrusted 
20/340	Iobit Malware Figther free 	
40/340	MBAM 1.51.2.300	
20/340	Exe Radar trail 1.3.4.0	
10/340	Ashampoo AntiMalware	
10/340	Superantispyware Trial v5.0.11311	
30/340	Panda Cloud Pro 	
70/340	Dr WEB Space pro v6 with firewall 	very depending on user decision 
110/340	Dr WEB Space pro v6 with firewall 	enabled the etended Protection from settings + Very depending on user 
T	k7 Ultimate security default	completed half of the test then exterminated the process
320/340	Comodo Firewall Default 	installed with Proactive protection 
320/340	Comodo Firewall  Defense + paranoid Mode	
310/340	Comodo Firewall   Sandboxed as Partilly Limted 	Defense + as safemode 
310/340	Comodo Firewall   Sandboxed as Limted 	Defense + as safemode   + some Popup interaction 
320/340	Comodo Firewall   Sandboxed as Restricted 	Defense + as safemode   +some popup interaction 
330/340	Comodo Firewall   Sandboxed as untrusted  	Defense + as safemode   +some popup interaction 
330/340	Comodo Firewall   Sandboxed as untrusted  	Defense + as Paranoid    +some popup interaction 
130/340	MaMutu v3.0.0.19	Default  
140/340	Mamutu v3.0.0.19	Paranoid mode
140/340	maMutu v3.0.0.19	Paranoid mode + Alret reduction 
150/340	maMutu v3.0.0.19	Alretreduction Only
140/340	Mamutu v3.0.0.19	Edit rules to monitor everything and Block all behavior for the clt.exe
10/340    Microsoft Security essentials 2.1.1116.0  
20/340    Preventon 5.0.32 Free antivirus 
340/340  Outpost security suite Full Protection Expret settings version 7.1.1    Extremely naggy 
90/340    Fortknox personal edition 7.0.505.0
140/340  Bufferzone Pro (Default settings)
20/340    Private Firewall 7 (Default settings)
280/340  Jetico Firewall v2 (default Settings ) Extremly naggy 
40/340    Filseclab Personal Firewall (default settings )
30/340    ashampo firewall 1.20 free
20/340    Rising personal Firewall 23.00.24.24
40/340    Sunbelt personal Firewall v4 (default settings)
30/340    zonealarm Firewall 9.2.106.000
T           Twister antivirus v7 (terminated the Process) 

this the Final Xls File
http://www.multiupload.com/0DBOCI177E

View Online
http://www.viewdocsonline.com/document/nw2eq9

anyway Ranget Hips certification system

Gold Certificate : OA Free, Outpost security suite , Malware Defender ,Spyshelter Free, Comodo , Defensewall+firewall

Silver Certificate :Kaspersky IS 2012 , threatFire , k7 , sandboxie ,Jetico free firewall , Defencewall

Bronze Certificate : Dr web space pro , Avira internet security 2012,AVira antivirus free 2012


anyway why you should care try it your self it's pretty fun

just for your information this CLT Test isn't 100% accurate somtimes it gave me false result like really Low result when i re tested i got a higher one
so i done testings more than one time for suspicious results
Note: I don't think this is a fair testing for security software you should relay on other review for deciding

anyway if you want more information try it your self

gonna do more fun testing and post results
and Plz don't flame me if i did anything wrong

[CloneRanger]

Hi, good to see you making use of the tests

The http://www.viewdocsonline.com/document/nw2eq9 www requires TONS of Scripting & Requests & SWF

Could you just post the results in here instead If you like you can upload them here as .TXT or .DOC files. If the results have screenies, then just upload them here with the text etc = Much better for all

TIA

[Ranget]

edited added Code box with the scores in it


Please give me some feedback did you like the test etc.....

i'm going to make some more test in the future

[Gobbler]

Something is seriously wrong with your testing of DefenseWall, did you run the CLT as untrusted?Which edition had you used for the test (HIPS/Firewall)?

[AaLF]

online armor

Defensewall

Man you've really destroyed some reputations there. Be interesting to see if others find same results on their installed setups.

[Rampastein]

Interesting test, although while you've changed settings for some programs (Comodo and Mamutu for example), many others are tested with just default settings although you could edit how the HIPS works.

Another thing is that while (AFAIK) many sandboxing programs would prevent CLT's tests from affecting the real system, CLT sees them as failures and as such products tested with sandboxing likely get lower results.

[AaLF]

My score: 220/340 >>> LnS FW - SBiE - SpyShelter

[Ilya Rabinovich]

Just downloaded and tested the latest CLT build. The results are standard- 330 of 340. This guy definitely didn't download the test tool with their browser untrusted.

[LoneWolf]

@Ranget
Test DefenseWall again if you can,
this time make sure the test is run as "untrusted"
(you must have ran the test as trusted the first time)
I've tested DefenseWall with this and got "330/340"

[AaLF]

I downloaded DefenseWall Hips and tried it unskilled as a beginner user and scored 310/340. Less than LoneWolf & Mr Rabinovich but damn good never the less.

Looks like I've got to consider a change to Online Armor or DefenseWall (i dislike the comodo panel).

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by AaLF

I downloaded DefenseWall Hips and tried it unskilled as a beginner user and scored 310/340. Less than LoneWolf & Mr Rabinovich but damn good never the less.

Looks like I've got to consider a change to Online Armor or DefenseWall (i dislike the comodo panel).

AaLF,
I ran the test on Xp Home, what OS are you using?
Just wondering if the OS might have something to do with the mixed results.

[AaLF]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

AaLF,
I ran the test on Xp Home, what OS are you using?
Just wondering if the OS might have something to do with the mixed results.

XP sp3 & LnS SBiE & DefenseWall Hips(trial)

I did the test again a few times & consistently scored 320.

Failed:
impersonation / coat
invasion / filedrop

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by AaLF

XP sp3 & LnS SBiE & DefenseWall Hips(trial)

I did the test again a few times & consistently scored 320.

Failed:
impersonation / coat
invasion / filedrop

Sp3 here also,
Curious, are you trialing DW HIPS+FW or DW HIPS?
Filedrop was the one that failed here with DW HIPS+FW.

[CloneRanger]

Tested CLT.exe whilst connected to the Internet, but all the time with ShadowDefender active



My score was 200/340 !

ProcessGuard blocked these attempts



Zemana also blocked quite a number of things but i didn't take screenies. ZoneAlarm Free, old version blocked ALL outbound attempts due to my setting it to Prompt for such events.

I'm not sure how vulnerable i would be to real Malware without SD with that score ? but with it i feel Very safe

[Gobbler]

Originally Posted by AaLF

XP sp3 & LnS SBiE & DefenseWall Hips(trial)

I did the test again a few times & consistently scored 320.

Failed:
impersonation / coat
invasion / filedrop

If you use the Firewall edition, you are going to get a score of 330, the one supposed "fail" which is the filedrop test is not actually a failure in this particular case of because of how DefenseWall works.The filedrop test simply drops a file to the system32 folder and because DefenseWall treats everything which is parented by an untrusted process untrusted, in this case the CLT the dropped file will be treated untrusted and will not be able to modify anything.So, the test is virtually 340/340.

[tomazyk]

I've got 320/340 with Malware Defender and Sandboxie. In MD rules I have Trusted network rule disabled. Results are good.

EDIT:
failed - Impersonation: BITS and RootkitInstallation: ChangeDrvPath

[Ranget]

Re did the test for Defnsewall as untrusted

310/340

as For my current setup 270/340

[Noob]

Ultra interesting!!
Nice quick comparison and even with different setting!! Like it

[Dark Shadow]

Originally Posted by CloneRanger

Tested CLT.exe whilst connected to the Internet, but all the time with ShadowDefender active

Attachment 229901

My score was 200/340 !

ProcessGuard blocked these attempts

Attachment 229902

Zemana also blocked quite a number of things but i didn't take screenies. ZoneAlarm Free, old version blocked ALL outbound attempts due to my setting it to Prompt for such events.

I'm not sure how vulnerable i would be to real Malware without SD with that score ? but with it i feel Very safe

Ah proceesguard,Loved it and miss it..I wish some one would resurrect the dead

[Ilya Rabinovich]

Originally Posted by Ranget

Re did the test for Defnsewall as untrusted

310/340

Sorry, but it had to be 330/340.

[J_L]

One minor typo (should be trial, not trail), but good job nonetheless.

[Ranget]

thanks for the comment and the correction sorry English isn't my first language

as for the defence wall test Run as untrusted i double checked the same
Result



did more tests

10/340       Microsoft Security essentials 2.1.1116.0  
20/340       Preventon 5.0.32 Free antivirus 
340/340     Outpost security suite Full Protection Expret settings version 7.1.1    Extremely naggy 
90/340       Fortknox personal edition 7.0.505.0
140/340     Bufferzone Pro (Default settings)
20/340      Private Firewall 7 (Default settings)
280/340    Jetico Firewall v2 (default Settings ) Extremly naggy 
40/340      Filseclab Personal Firewall (default settings )
30/340      ashampo firewall 1.20 free
20/340      Rising personal Firewall 23.00.24.24
40/340      Sunbelt personal Firewall v4 (default settings)
30/340      zonealarm Firewall 9.2.106.000
T              Twister antivirus v7 (terminated the Process)   

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by Ranget

Re did the test for Defnsewall as untrusted

310/340

If you are testing DW HIPS try the test with DW HIPS + FW.

[Ranget]

yup that was the problem the firewall
because actully Defensewall firewall is better than Microsoft of course

any way defencewall is product

[Ilya Rabinovich]

That's strange. At my computer, "Coat" is covered. Maybe, a kind of interferrention with another security program?