Comodo Firewall Pro V3 Beta 3 Released

Just a heads up for you firewall testers. From user input on the forum it sounds like it went through some drastic changes in the interface and some more security parts added such as ddos protection which is not active yet. And an mode for installations.

Post what you think if your testing.

The remember checkbox has been set to ticked by default in this version, say what you think about it...higher risk...easier use?

https://forums.comodo.com/cfp_beta_corner/cfp_30229_beta_has_been_released-t13159.0.html

 

Downloaded and installed for now. Much better than 2.4. I wish them luck.

 

Downloaded and installed the latest beta. It is working great. Light on resources. Much better than the alpha a few months back.

LC

 

Coolio10 do you mind posting more screenshots of CFP? I love their new GUI and I would like to see more.

 

wow UI looks great and so do the features......haven't tried comodo in mths...but looks like the day is coming nearer...

 

Working fine here...

 

i hear many good things about this firewall comodo firewall

i dont know it coz i use kaspersky internet security 7
but if i use antivir premuim i will use comodo firewall with it coz i like to try comodo firewall and i will make test for the firewall from this site
www.firewallleaktester.com

 

Thanks for the news.

Looks like I might finally be able to ditch ZA Free on my Vista setup.

 

Should pass all tests. The current version 2.4 passes 95% of the tests so with the added HIPS it should pass all.

 

Installation Mode is a feature that was soooo badly needed. Love it.

 

thank you how i add hips in comodo firewall ?

 

Its called defence+. It is on automatically after install.

 

thank you

 

Why would people pay for ProSecurity and its cousins when Comodo is doing all this for free?

 

Does Comodo 3 allow for easy changes from a trusted network to one that is not trusted? With Comodo 2.4 this is a pain and must be done manually. (Zone Alarm and the built in Vista FW handle this issue very well, for example.)

 

Just some thoughts on my brief trial...

The Positive:

Fantastic GUI. If it does not set the standard, it comes very close. Just my opinion, of course.

Impressively light resource usage, including low mem usage and private bytes usage.

The HIPS (Defense+) seems to be uber powerful. I did not spend too much time on it, but it appears to let nothing loose that it hasn't got a rule for yet unless, of course, it is set to training mode.

The negative:

Almost too many features. It will take an intrepid individual to get comfortable with all the available options.

Creating []granular[/i] firewall rules on the fly seems impossible. It is a headache setting them up. That said, once they are set up they can be saved to a config file and used later.

Where is the ability to create loopback rules? I see this nowhere, even with Alert Level set to highest. This really bugs me if they can not be manually created. Someone please clarify this.

Logging of firewall packets is still second rate.

Overall, it is a very impressive looking security package, especially the HIPS module.

 

Yep, it is implemented now.

 

When Comodo Firewall Pro 3 comes out I will be dropping Outpost Pro. It has become a bloated pain, but one that I have gotten used to.

Well the only reason is if ProSecurity does it better, but with Comodo doing it..I doubt ProSecurity and its cousins will be needed.

 

Sounds excellent. The recent buzz-word on security apps has been about the ability of the app to prevent dis-abling by malicious code.

How's CPF 3.x looking on that score??


//

 

Is there any slowdown in browsing-speed? Any difference in boot-times or opening the gui? Compared with 2.xx versions...

 

This HIPS crap is the most anoying thing i've ever seen. Vista's UAC is a kiddy toy against this thing...

 

Is that a good or bad thing? First you say its alerts are annoying as hell and than you say vistas uac is a toy vs this?

No slowdown in any way for me.

Comodo V3 should pass all termination attempts as proven by this test. I know it was done with version 2 but version 3 should be the same or better.

 

Ok the new CFP has HIPS. So I have ThreatFire installed which is also a HIPS, right? I've heard that it's not a HIPS at all and is something else. Anyway so my question is if ThreatFire is NOT a HIPS then should I leave ThreatFire installed and will I be ok if I allow CFP's HIPS to be active? Are these two the same techologies or what? By the way I'm very happy with TF so if TF is indeed a HIPS and considering that CFP has HIPS. Which is one is stronger of the two? Which should I keep. Also just to make mention I don't plan on installing CFP until it goes final.

 

Threafire i am guessing is what used to be cyberhawk? If it is than it is not a HIPS but behaviour blocker. A HIPS is much stronger and secure. If your not used to seeing alerts for every little thing than keep threatfire and disable the defence+ of cpf. I used to use cyberhawk with comodo 2.4 until i noticed comodo had the same behaviour blocking as cyberhawk so you might as well uninstall threatfire if you choose to install cpf 3.

 

^Yeah, Defense+ in Comodo should be a strong HIPS and very good too.