COMODO Firewall Pro 3.0.22.349 has been released!

[Coolio10]

CHKDSK bug fixed!

Enjoy.

Hi Guys,

I would like to announce the availability of COMODO Firewall Pro 3.0.22.349. Previous versions should be able to update themselves through automatic updates.

Download locations:
----------------------------

32-bit Setup
http://forums.comodo.com/feedbackcom...-t22011.0.html
Size: 17.3 MB (18,149,376 bytes)
MD5: d54a30e71251915a16763fe48f502571
SHA1: 1bb22aea64cf9ce773e2e904265101f6731bc6d0

64-bit Setup
http://forums.comodo.com/feedbackcom...-t22011.0.html
Size: 27.2 MB (28,590,080 bytes)
MD5: c33cd85968adc4d78071d132b7406364
SHA1: f3e12ef86675a7ce53521d677e237f1eaa4503fc

Whats New in 3.0.22.349?
--------------------------------------

FIXED! BSOD SESSION_INITIALIZATION_FAILED after ChkDsk.
FIXED! BUG causing D+ to allow file modification attempts although it is blocked under some circumstances.
IMPROVED! Reduced false positives for D+ keyboard access alerts.
IMPROVED! Removed false positives for D+ service control manager access for XP computers.
IMPROVED! Increased D+ ability to protect itself from already installed rootkits.

Regards,
Egemen

Download Page: http://www.personalfirewall.comodo.c..._firewall.html

[computer geek]

Excellent!
The last one messed me up with chkdsk hope this one proves better.

[osip]

Will this v also fix the problem with PerfectDisk boot defrag ?

[Snarl]

Originally Posted by osip

Will this v also fix the problem with PerfectDisk boot defrag ?

Perfect Disk 2008 also just came out with an Update, Build 52 (SP2) - 4/17/2008.

http://www.raxco.com/support/kb_deta...action=options

[HyperFlow]

Originally Posted by osip

Will this v also fix the problem with PerfectDisk boot defrag ?

my 1st attempt was the same no glory! after a reboot and a retry all went very smooth no problems it seems to be fixed.

[duke1959]

My PC is running quite well with only Avira Antivir Premium 8.0 and Mamutu behind a wireless router firewall, but the temptation to install Comodo too has hit me, especially after reading how good this new version runs. Anyone else using Comodo with a Behavior Blocker/HIPS or thinks it would hurt? Thanks.

[osip]

Confirming boot defrag with PD.52 and newest Comodo worked perfectly...

Originally Posted by duke1959

My PC is running quite well with only Avira Antivir Premium 8.0 and Mamutu behind a wireless router firewall, but the temptation to install Comodo too has hit me, especially after reading how good this new version runs. Anyone else using Comodo with a Behavior Blocker/HIPS or thinks it would hurt? Thanks.

Running 2 HIPS will cause conflicts.

Defense+ in CFP 3 is VERY POWERFUL.

BTW... This is a GREAT release, All credit goes to Comodo.

Josh

[EASTER]

Comodo D+ is a very good advance from their past experience as a firewall only/Boclean etc. maker but it still doesn't sway my persuasion away from EQS no matter how hard i try. Kerio 2.15 + EQS fits my own style of protection along with Returnil ATM.

I do recommend it however due to it's combo but the HIPS require some great deal of effort to quiet down IMO. Most new users still would pfffttt., and prefer to want automated duo protection without having to use at lest some brain/decision interaction right?

[Kees1958]

Originally Posted by duke1959

My PC is running quite well with only Avira Antivir Premium 8.0 and Mamutu behind a wireless router firewall, but the temptation to install Comodo too has hit me, especially after reading how good this new version runs. Anyone else using Comodo with a Behavior Blocker/HIPS or thinks it would hurt? Thanks.

With mamutu you will get some extra messages, because Mamutu (A2 Service) obtains high level rights. Thsi works okay with TF and Mamutu, http://www.wilderssecurity.com/newre...eply&p=1225332

Regards K

[aigle]

Originally Posted by duke1959

My PC is running quite well with only Avira Antivir Premium 8.0 and Mamutu behind a wireless router firewall, but the temptation to install Comodo too has hit me, especially after reading how good this new version runs. Anyone else using Comodo with a Behavior Blocker/HIPS or thinks it would hurt? Thanks.

Don,t forget.

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=180918

[duke1959]

Originally Posted by aigle

Don,t forget.

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=180918

I haven't and thanks. This PC security addiction is hard to kick. I'll be sober 12 years this month and writing a book that is very important for me to finish, and yet here I am excited about Comodo. LOL. I laugh, but this is a form of insanity. I do however, enjoy using these programs and have kept Avira and Mamutu on board. I just thought adding Comodo as my Firewall and a different type of HIPS than Mamutu, would be the Nirvana of security I seem to be looking for. LOL. Perhaps Comodo and Avira only? Thanks to everyone for your replies, and a special thanks to you aigle. That old thread reminded me that I once again need to try and move on, but it also reminded me of why it was so hard to do so. Sometimes it felt like one big family who share the same interests. I think for a loner like myself this was the biggest part of why I came back, but I must say that I feel for the most part the family atmosphere seems to be almost gone now. Hopefully I can stay with just Avira, Mamutu, and perhaps Comodo as my security. But I know thanks to the old thread aigle posted. What I really need to do is once again try and stay out of here and finish my book. LOL. Take care all. And a special hello to innerpeace who I have come to call a friend.

[EASTER]

COMODO D+ is a killer. LoL

I was testing BOTH EQS & Comodo D+ together because they both run stable together and for fun i terminated EQSecure in the Comodo Active Process List and it blasted it to pieces. The EQS tray icon stayed up but after opening it's configuration settings every single checkmark previously made were wiped cleaned all the way across, plus it stopped it cold from alerting to anything anymore.

EQS better find a way for some better self-protection because Comodo's D+ Terminator is a sure destroyer, and if it can blast another HIPS in that manner it can definitely put down malware in a single stroke!

EASTER

[sukarof]

I havent used comodo seriously since 2.4 but today I decided to download it. I installed it in my Vista Sp1. During the installation I told it not to use the Defence+ since I just want a simple outbound filtering firewall.
After the reboot the darn Defence+ was activated nevertheless.
I disabled it in the gui.
I had Comodo FW set to "Clean PC mode" and later to "custom". (I did not use the "installation mode" or "learning mode")
This is what happened:
Comodo asked for permission for Firefox b5 and windows mail, but that was about all the warnings I got.

Wubi (ubuntu installer) could download the latest ubuntu in the background happily.
Totalcommander could connect through ftp to another IP without any reaction from comodo. I looked at the log, it showed no entries. I looked in the connections and it did not show all the things that were connected to internet (Wubi for example).
I ran the simple GRC leaktest and Comodo let it straight through without any warning.
In the info window it doesnt show any connections even thought I had Wubi downloading the latest Ubuntu in the background.
I looked at what predefined rules there was and it had only one rule for IGMP or something like it. I remember from my 2.4 days that it had atleast this "block all" rule in the bottom that would catch all the connections that wasnt allowed before that. Are you supposed to create all the basic rules manually?
All this was allowed regardless if I ran it in Clean PC mode or custom.
"Disable all" seems to work though, when I enabled that nothing could get out, but there should be more modes than allow everything or nothing

I probably are missing something very obvious here but if not:
Why idoesnt Comodo do its job? is it because:
1. FW doesnt work well in Vista SP1?
2. FW doesnt work out of the box?

[Bluenile]

When you installed did you select 'leak test protection'.

If so that's why D+ was still partly activated.

Did you have the GRC Leak Test on your PC before installing Comodo? If so that's why it's probably deemed it as being safe.

[sukarof]

Thanks Bluenile.
Yes I had leaktest protection on. So that would explain the numerous popups in the beginning.
Yes I had GRC leaktest on my hard drive, but I didnt let Comodo do the search for malware, and isnt it through that search Comodo decides what software are on the computer.
Now it hits me that I might have misunderstood the "Clean PC" mode. I suppose that means that if I run in that mode it allows everything that is on the computer, only the new stuff gets inspected?
My ignorance shines through again
I will try it again...

[Coolio10]

Originally Posted by sukarof

Thanks Bluenile.
Yes I had leaktest protection on. So that would explain the numerous popups in the beginning.
Yes I had GRC leaktest on my hard drive, but I didnt let Comodo do the search for malware, and isnt it through that search Comodo decides what software are on the computer.
Now it hits me that I might have misunderstood the "Clean PC" mode. I suppose that means that if I run in that mode it allows everything that is on the computer, only the new stuff gets inspected?
My ignorance shines through again
I will try it again...

Exactly.

It asks you during installation if your pc is clean. If you answer no than train with safe mode should activated instead of clean pc.

[ggf31416]

Originally Posted by sukarof

I ran the simple GRC leaktest and Comodo let it straight through without any warning.

All this was allowed regardless if I ran it in Clean PC mode or custom.
"Disable all" seems to work though, when I enabled that nothing could get out, but there should be more modes than allow everything or nothing

I probably are missing something very obvious here but if not:
Why idoesnt Comodo do its job? is it because:
1. FW doesnt work well in Vista SP1?
2. FW doesnt work out of the box?

If the firewall is in custom mode it should stop the GRC leaktest regardless of defense+. If it doesn't it's because of a bad install or a conflict.