COMODO Firewall Pro 3.0.14.276 Released

[Vettetech]

Originally Posted by OHM

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

Thats a common problem you can find your answer in the Comodo forums. You have to shut down the Security center in windows. Just go into services.msc. Then go into C/Windows/System32/wbem and delete the Repository folder then reboot.

[strangequark]

Originally Posted by chaos16

Anyone here now using the latest version of Avast free antivirus and Comodo 3.0 latest version?
any conflict like before or now its been fixed?

yep, everything seems ok so far, the only minor problem is that there are a couple of files that reappear in My Pending Files after every update, I send them to My Own Safe files but there they are again next time, but as I say that's only a minor irritation.

Originally Posted by Vettetech

Thats a common problem you can find your answer in the Comodo forums. You have to shut down the Security center in windows. Just go into services.msc. Then go into C/Windows/System32/wbem and delete the Repository folder then reboot.

Thanks!
But where is services.msc?

[MikeNash]

Originally Posted by OHM

Thanks!
But where is services.msc?

Its the service control panel. "Administrative Tools ---> Services"

You can also get there by typing "Services.msc" into the "Run" dialog

Start---> RUN ---> Services.msc [Enter]

Originally Posted by MikeNash

Its the service control panel. "Administrative Tools ---> Services"

You can also get there by typing "Services.msc" into the "Run" dialog

Start---> RUN ---> Services.msc [Enter]

Thanks Mike!
Have a nice day

[Kees1958]

Originally Posted by Diver

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 There was a recent survey that found something like 45% the computers in the US had out of date AV signatures due to factory loaded commercial AV's expiring and another 40% with no firewall active, and many of these do have problems.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.

Totally agree, have not had any reply on this post http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showp...1&postcount=26

Newby shows that with a very simple program like VistaFireWallControl (without the Vista FireWall active) blocks most leak tests

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showp...58&postcount=3
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showp...96&postcount=5
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showp...02&postcount=7

I think LUA with Defender is as strong as D+ and VistaFireWallCOntrol only misses PC Flanktester, DSNtester, Ghost and Wallbreaker compared to Comodo.

After all it is all a matter of hassle (answering questions most users do not the answer on) and perceived protection (VistaFireWallCOntrol versus Comodo) and the real chance of infection.

Regards Comodo lovers (please stirr up the discussion)

Originally Posted by Kees1958

Totally agree, have not had any reply on this post http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showp...1&postcount=26

Newby shows that with a very simple program like VistaFireWallControl (without the Vista FireWall active) blocks most leak tests

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showp...58&postcount=3
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showp...96&postcount=5
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showp...02&postcount=7

I think LUA with Defender is as strong as D+ and VistaFireWallCOntrol only misses PC Flanktester, DSNtester, Ghost and Wallbreaker compared to Comodo.

After all it is all a matter of hassle (answering questions most users do not the answer on) and perceived protection (VistaFireWallCOntrol versus Comodo) and the real chance of infection.

Regards Comodo lovers (please stirr up the discussion)

Hi,
Does it mean that Vista Firewall is as good as COMODO v3?
Sorry if I'm not getting your point.

Regards,

[SystemJunkie]

Quote:
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).

That´s it but your story with armpits was ugly.. my good imagination doesn´t want to visualize this smell..

I'm glad to see that CPF now passes with success the seven keylogging tests from AKLT v3.0, good job to them (below is the 7th test, GetRawInputData).

Think so! Very cool and that will be the main reason too why nobody wants OA free anymore.

Ok uninstalled my trusty Online Armor and installed this. Much, much improved. No annoying pop ups, Installs easy. Learns well. I am impressed with this new version. Yes I have D+ on.

As you see! I am right.. hehe.

Its a proven fact that Online Armor and Comodo are the 2 top software firewalls. Its just which one your prefer

Comodo, but who wants to pay for equivalent security(OA)? So we drive very comfortable with comodo.

In my IMO ZAAS is a very nice Firewall, but it does come with the Welcome Screen hesitation problem.

Exactly.. the zone alarm winlogon drama is the same ignorance with dr.webs cruel heuristic.. nothing changes. But now we have Comodo and that´s really great! Good work guys!

[Kees1958]

Originally Posted by OHM

Hi,
Does it mean that Vista Firewall is as good as COMODO v3?
Sorry if I'm not getting your point.

Regards,

Sorry OHM,

No when on Vista with UAC on, you can not run into much problems. VistaFireWallControl (VFWC) gives some easy outbound control. Defender will give you also notification when something important is changed.

Point I am making is that Comodo is a great free HIPS/FW, but it is to intrusive to use. On XP Online Armor is a far more user freindly solution and as strong as Comodo. On Vista 64 with UAC, Defenser and VFWC the additional 64 bits goodies will give you simular protection without the hassle. On Vista 32 the same applies when you use UAC and for instance ThreatFire or Drive Sentry instead of Defense+

Getting a lot of pop-ups does not nessecarely mean it is safer.

Security = (Scope of the application -/- user errors using the aplication) * (complexity of the application -/- hidden bugs) * (1 - chance of infection)


Regards

[Vettetech]

Originally Posted by Kees1958

Sorry OHM,

No when on Vista with UAC on, you can not run into much problems. VistaFireWallControl (VFWC) gives some easy outbound control. Defender will give you also notification when something important is changed.

Point I am making is that Comodo is a great free HIPS/FW, but it is to intrusive to use. On XP Online Armor is a far more user freindly solution and as strong as Comodo. On Vista 64 with UAC, Defenser and VFWC the additional 64 bits goodies will give you simular protection without the hassle. On Vista 32 the same applies when you use UAC and for instance ThreatFire or Drive Sentry instead of Defense+

Getting a lot of pop-ups does not nessecarely mean it is safer.

Security = (Scope of the application -/- user errors using the aplication) * (complexity of the application -/- hidden bugs) * (1 - chance of infection)


Regards

So true...........

[Diver]

Kees1958,

Thanks for the post & Links. With XP I manage the elevation problem with MakeMeAdmin and LaunchAdmin. A few programs can be a real headache to set up as they write user data to Program Files subfolders and require permission changes. When needed I open an elevated command window and drag an icon to it, type a command, or run ie elevated as a file manager. When I was using Vista (that OS makes me sick) I just lived with the UAC prompts. Vista SP1 cuts down on the number of prompts required for file manipulations in protected directories, but MS really needs to make the elevation persist for a few minutes as it does in Ubuntu.

What is great about LUA is it works with nearly any firewall or AV, its free, does not slow your system down one bit, and uses no memory, unless you count the 2 MB for LaunchAdmin.

I guess I will keep using Comodo 2.4.

[Fuzzfas]

I think Comodo is the perfect firewall for control freaks, who normally use classical HIPS. I think they did a great job in that sector. Initially it looked intimidating with all the sections that one can click, but once you read the manual, Comodo isn't more annoying than SSM for example. I have kept the HIPS part activated in "PC clean" mode, which is what i think is very cosy and i didn't have many pop ups. I could say that SSM Free, even when you put it in learning mode, still sometimes asks for permission on some programs, while Comodo is more silent. On the other hand, if someone isn't a control freak, can deactivate in part or in whole the HIPS part in Comodo and stick with the excellent firewall.

OA Free is more friendly overall and a more logic compromise between security and easy of use (you got to love the "run safer" feature"), but for me has a slight instability with Emule (upload speed should be rock stable ,while with OA it oscillates all the time), so i m staying with Comodo! I got rid of SSM too, which is great!

In any case, there are 2 very nice FREE firewalls out there to satisfy even the most difficult "clients".

[SystemJunkie]

On XP Online Armor is a

.. problem because the free version does not protect against keyloggers.

but for me has a slight instability with Emule (upload speed should be rock stable ,while with OA it oscillates all the time), so i m staying with Comodo!

As I said all will switch to comodo.. hehe, no matter what is cool on OA free or not.. fact is Anti-Keylogging has priority, so OA free will lose most user(probably all user), it is absolut logical and reasonable behavior and a natural sign of intelligence.

[Fuzzfas]

Originally Posted by SystemJunkie

.. problem because the free version does not protect against keyloggers.

As I said all will switch to comodo.. hehe, no matter what is cool on OA free or not.. fact is Anti-Keylogging has priority, so OA free will lose most user(probably all user), it is absolut logical and reasonable behavior and a natural sign of intelligence.

I don't think OA will lose all users. I think OA Free is more suitable for users with little HIPS experience but WILLING to learn and for medium experienced users or users that don't want so complete control over their pc because they feel safe anyway. OA is a firewall that one could easily learn to use even if he doesn't know what a HIPS is.

On the other hand, Comodo, is stirring things up in the HIPS arena, because for my case, there is no reason to have a classical HIPS when you have Comodo + D+ and it runs so light!!! Also same goes for firewalls. Right now i have disabled the Bit Defender Firewall IS 2008 firewall and running Comodo instead (no conflicts).

Even if i had to disable the HIPS (which i see no reason till now, since it's behaving very well and remains quiet), i love the firewall part. I am so happy that:

1) I am starting to get paranoid about the fact that they give this for free! (Yes, i ve read their explanation in comodo site, still i am suspicious... Soon i ll start monitoring ports to see if it phones home by any chance despite the fact that i disabled all phone home mechanisms).

2) I think i won't update to the next version, because this one runs so well, that i fear that a next one might ruin something. I try many firewalls and change them from time to time and i am completely certain that even my surfing is more snappy! I feel like i found the "golden version". Unless i encounter a serious bug, i ll stick with it for a long time, because usually when you fix something in security applications, you brake something else.

3) The HIPS part while intimidating at first, is now more likeable to me than SSM was, which i can't beleive it.

4) I am worried that there MUST be something that i don't like in it, but i can't find it yet. (yeah, it is a bit complicated, with many menus, but has a help file and pending files are a bit weird and a nice firewall log would be welcome, but i get used to them, so i can live with them).

5) Did i mention that i a get paranoid for the fact that this is free?

[mick92z]

Hello,can anyone advise on two queries.I currently have V3.0.13.268 defence+ off. I am having absolutely no problems,is there any point installing 3.0.14.276. Secondly does the newer version with defence + on, have the same amount of pop up alerts. I was getting hundreds(especially when installing programs ), so turned it off. Thanks for any answers

[WSFuser]

I would upgrade for the performance tweaks at least. If you want you can look over whats fixed and decide if any apply to you.

[Bubba]

once again, numerous off topic posts removed.

The thread title is the subject of discussion. Those that wish to discuss other firewalls, Please do so in an appropriate thread or privately Please.

Thanks,
Bubba

Originally Posted by Kees1958

Sorry OHM,

No when on Vista with UAC on, you can not run into much problems. VistaFireWallControl (VFWC) gives some easy outbound control. Defender will give you also notification when something important is changed.

Point I am making is that Comodo is a great free HIPS/FW, but it is to intrusive to use. On XP Online Armor is a far more user freindly solution and as strong as Comodo. On Vista 64 with UAC, Defenser and VFWC the additional 64 bits goodies will give you simular protection without the hassle. On Vista 32 the same applies when you use UAC and for instance ThreatFire or Drive Sentry instead of Defense+

Getting a lot of pop-ups does not nessecarely mean it is safer.

Security = (Scope of the application -/- user errors using the aplication) * (complexity of the application -/- hidden bugs) * (1 - chance of infection)


Regards

Thanks for your lucid reply.
Now I really want to try OA, however, it's not Vista compatible yet.

Regards

P.S It is unbelievable. COMODO leaves so much registry dumps behind after uninstalling it, which I really really hate.

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by SystemJunkie

That´s it but your story with armpits was ugly.. my good imagination doesn´t want to visualize this smell..

First off you took a quote by Bellgamin and myself and combined them into a quote by me. Whats up with that ?

Story of armpits What are you talking about

Originally Posted by SystemJunkie

As I said all will switch to comodo

I will never switch to Comodo and niether will alot of members here. Those that like it will keep it and those that don't will not. I have Tried CPF more times then I would ever do again.
Not a Comodo fan here as you can tell. But I can see your becoming a fanboy of comodo.

[WSFuser]

About the armpits: its on the first page of this thread

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by WSFuser

About the armpits: its on the first page of this thread

Ahhh.... Now I see......Thanks WSFuser

[Perman]

Originally Posted by OHM

Thanks for your lucid reply.
Now I really want to try OA, however, it's not Vista compatible yet.

Regards

P.S It is unbelievable. COMODO leaves so much registry dumps behind after uninstalling it, which I really really hate.

Hi,

Troubled by registry residues ? Comodo firewall is not alone. IMO, all apps proudly equipped with so-called sophisticated HIPS, complicated firewall rules, will certainly produce these types of leftover; OA will, ZA pro no exception. Even, a low profiled Scoty, WinPatrol , will produce certain amt of cyber garbage.

Therefore, please do not

Point finger at Comodo firewall Solely. Don't you want your favorite firewall to protect you to its full strength ? You get what you want. In the meantime,

You just need to find a smooth way to overcome those problems.

Cures are registry cleaner and registry editor and lots of your patience. IMO, Total Uninstaller or Ashampoo Uninstaller platinum suites will just be few steps short from being competent, in spite of what vendors have loudly claimed.

Take care.

[Bubba]

off topic posts removed.

As requested a few posts above, the subject matter is the discussion of "COMODO Firewall Pro 3.0.14.276 Released".

Thanks,
Bubba

[SystemJunkie]

But I can see your becoming a fanboy of comodo.

Yes especially because it is actually the best available Anti-Keylogger
and for free.

Unless i encounter a serious bug, i ll stick with it for a long time, because usually when you fix something in security applications, you brake something else.

Yes that is true in several cases.

The thread title is the subject of discussion. Those that wish to discuss other firewalls, Please do so in an appropriate thread

Agree totally.

I am starting to get paranoid about the fact that they give this for free! (Yes, i ve read their explanation in comodo site, still i am suspicious... Soon i ll start monitoring ports

No reason to do that, I´d be more concerned about ZAs phone homes. Comodo is a bullet proof thing.

[_ab]

Since this is a minor update, can it be installed via update function over the 3.0.14.168 version or has the prior version first to be uninstalled?