COMODO Firewall Pro 3.0.14.276 Released

[firzen771]

anybody know what are the best settings for Comodo 3? like a guide for the best setup?

Ok, I'm kind of tired of waiting for OA to support Vista.
I'm gonna try CPF.
Any issues on Vista?

[trjam]

I am getting a BSOD and cant even get to the login screen for Vista. It just hangs on reboot.

[trjam]

when installing I get those flash up screens about some drivers cant be verified, but they flash so quickly you cant read them. I know what they are from having Aviras beta on my main PC and on installing it you have to click them.

[ProSecurity]

I find it interesting that some like to see the smallest number of popups.

I for one find it empowering to be able to control the behavior of any app on my machine.

The ability to determine which files/directories may be modified by any app with Comodo 3 Defense+ is particularly appealing.

Why should I give carte blanche access to my entire filesystem to, for example, Mozilla?
Or anything other than HTTP (port 80) access to any browser?

Under Unix, it just does not work this way!

[bellgamin]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

If only that were true.
I guess it was maybe 10 years ago.
If you can stay safe with that, then great.
But there are far too many threats today to rely on only a FW and AV.

When you run Comodo FW plus an AV, you actually have THREE security apps -- (1) antivirus, (2) firewall, & (3) an industrial strength, broad-scope classical HIPS (D+, that is).

[ProSecurity]

Originally Posted by bellgamin

When you run Comodo FW plus an AV, you actually have THREE security apps -- (1) antivirus, (2) firewall, & (3) an industrial strength, broad-scope classical HIPS (D+, that is).

To give out something this good for free...

I find myself continually saying, "Where's the catch?"

[Diver]

Originally Posted by Wordward

All i can say is this is a very smooth running program and installed without a hitch. PC was fast, browser fast, and reboots seemed to be what is normal for my PC. Learning mode helped a lot in letting me use my PC and not be bothered that much with pop ups, and I think if it does what all it says it does, it will be very protective of a PC. However, as I found myself reading through the many different help and sections of the GUI I found myself asking if all this stuff was truly needed? It seems like a lot of protection, but it also seems a little overwhelming as well. Does this make sense? I realize I'm asking this in a sometimes paranoid forum where many of us want all we can get for protection, but again I ask is this just too much? I have currently uninstalled it to try and take care of a current ThreatFire install problem and CPF uninstalled just fine with only a few folders and registry keys left over. All in all this was a very pleasing experience and free to boot. No pun intended. LOL.

Wordward, you ask the ultimate question. It seems very hard to find an answer as there is no comparative data available. Consider that there are literally millions of computers protected with only AVG free and the XP firewall and so many of these never have a problem. There was a recent survey that found something like 45% the computers in the US had out of date AV signatures due to factory loaded commercial AV's expiring and another 40% with no firewall active, and many of these do have problems.

We read a lot about drive by downloads and zero day attacks, but I wonder how many of these actually result in infections without at least one user consent given incorrectly.

For all we hear about leak proof firewalls, stories about how they caught an infection phoning home that everything else missed are very scarce. Does it just not happen that way?

I give Comodo credit for their HIPS as it is focused on preventing infection. However, I wonder how much more effective a HIPS is (if any) than a limited user account. The LUA will not stop everything, but it places large parts of the machine off limits. Installing drivers is not possible so no hidden keyloggers, No active-X installed to IE. No kernel patching for root kits. New stuff can run, but it is damn hard to hide it.

In fact, I often wonder if an AV that tests at 99.9% is really giving more protection than one that tests at 97% because the omitted samples may simply not be important.

My 2 centavos.

[ProSecurity]

Originally Posted by Diver

In fact, I often wonder if an AV that tests at 99.9% is really giving more protection than one that tests at 97% because the omitted samples may simply not be important.

My 2 centavos.

This reminds me of the VB100 test with 100 test malwares compared to AV-Comparatives with hundreds of thousands.

[Vettetech]

Ok my problem is back and its not Windowblinds. When I go into D+/Advanced/Computer Security Policy there is nothing listed. If I exit Comodo by right click on the icon and hitting exit then double click and reopen Comodo. After doing that everything is there.

[Coolio10]

Originally Posted by Vettetech

Ok my problem is back and its not Windowblinds. When I go into D+/Advanced/Computer Security Policy there is nothing listed. If I exit Comodo by right click on the icon and hitting exit then double click and reopen Comodo. After doing that everything is there.

You uninstalled windowsblinds?

[Vettetech]

Originally Posted by Coolio10

You uninstalled windowsblinds?

No reason to to that. I am not currently using any skins for WB.

[Coolio10]

Originally Posted by Vettetech

No reason to to that. I am not currently using any skins for WB.

It might be interfering with the interface drawing. Is it set as trusted?

[Vettetech]

Originally Posted by Coolio10

It might be interfering with the interface drawing. Is it set as trusted?

Yes. I unloaded Windowsblinds completely and I am using just plain old XP desktop and the problem is gone. You can add programs not to be skinned but it doesnt seem to help. it definity is Windowblinds. I amde 2 reboots and no problems. I loaded WB again and problem back. Atleast I know is not Comodo.

[Vettetech]

Ok played around long enough. How many times do you actually have to open up Comodo anyways. I will live with it. My surfing speed seems faster then with Online Armor. Does Comodo have a web shield like Online Armor?

Hopefully, it does.
I think COMODO has all the features.

[Coolio10]

Originally Posted by Vettetech

Ok played around long enough. How many times do you actually have to open up Comodo anyways. I will live with it. My surfing speed seems faster then with Online Armor. Does Comodo have a web shield like Online Armor?

Comodo is not a suite like online armor.

[Phazor]

Thinking of giving Comodo a try. Is there anything I must do during install on a computer that has multiple users (XP)?

[Vettetech]

Well back to Online Armor. Comodo just loced up BF2 and Time Shift. Then I played HL2 Ep 2 and TF2. I had 500 pending files. That feature is dumb. Well I tried Comodo 3.0 again and its still not for me. Comodo 2.4 was better. Sorry Coolio.

[Coolio10]

Originally Posted by Phazor

Thinking of giving Comodo a try. Is there anything I must do during install on a computer that has multiple users (XP)?

Nope.

[firzen771]

Originally Posted by firzen771

anybody know what are the best settings for Comodo 3? like a guide for the best setup?

anybody, some suggestions?

[Vettetech]

Originally Posted by firzen771

anybody, some suggestions?

Yup.....................dont do it.

[Wordward]

It ran well for me, but I kept getting this feeling that at any minute something could go wrong with my PC. There's just way too much protection going on for me. LOL.

Errrr, howcome Windows Security Center detects COMODO Firewall Pro, even after uninstalling it?

[bellgamin]

Originally Posted by Vettetech

Yes. I unloaded Windowsblinds completely and I am using just plain old XP desktop and the problem is gone.

I visit several forums & read about WB-related problems quite often. It is a notorious de-stabilizer of computers.