Comodo continues to issue certificates to known Malware

Forum: COU
More Info: MSMVPS Blogs

 

Followup to http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21634814 ? I have Opera set up to warn me if any site tries to use a Comodo sponsored certificate.

 

sded, thanks for the additional info

 

All I can say is - yikes!

 

This 'CoreGuard' tool downloads an installer to the user, then proceeds a longer download, bringing all sorts of junk with it.

With Shadow Defender on, tried to install, but having problems with wireless, so just quarantined the process.

Just a note, once installed, very difficult to uninstall. Tries to connect and download itself again.






Buy page:

 

The sad thing is that during these hard economic times there will be companies go toe's up,
not as a direct result of the economy,but rather as a result of a "Ends justify the mean's" business model, in response to the economy.
Perhaps Comodo teeters on the brink of such a fate.
So much for "building trust on line""

 

"building trust on line"
Between this thread and the ask.com fiasco, Comodo surely has lost mine.
I would like to hear Comodo's side or excuse but I doubt if we will.
That's a shame too because CIS worked so well on my system.
I will find alternatives.
Sometimes things aren't always free.
There is a price to pay.

 

Just another reason I wont touch any software that has the Comodo name.

 

Re: Comodo continues to issue certificates to known Malware.

So... you got $15 in your pocket and a domain, then you can buy an SSL cert...
buying ssl cert is very easy (unfortunately)...

so any malware provider simply goes gets it...

they can get it from Verisign, Godaddy, Comodo etc... so if you are a malware author and have a domain you can buy an SSL.

Cheers,
Josh

 

That said thing is: endusers don't understand it, Including my self, Because they see a DV Certificate on a website and think it's legitimate. Geotrust removed validation process and named it DV... And ANYONE can then buy a DV. Then Comodo, etc were forced to do the same.

Cheers,
Josh

 

maybe mr. sded will now remove all certification authorities from his browser?

 

It's an issue... This isn't first time either. DV should be banned, Validation process should be carefully re constructed by CA's.

As for Rouges... Just... EWWWW...

Cheers,
Josh

 

Does it really?
Does Kaspersky, Online Armor, Avira, Outlook etc. do the same thing or is it just Comodo?
This is what I'd like to find out.

 

Considering how those companies you listed aren't in the certificate business at all, I doubt it.

 

Funny thing is,all the controversy comodo generates and we're supposed to believe everything is fine,especially these days with rogue software applications popping up every day,nope I'm not convinced at all. Comodo's reputation is hardly anything to be proud of.

 

Do Verisign,Godaddy or Geotrust offer end user security programs?
Its really the Ask thing again
Its OK to be a criminal defense lawyer.
Its OK to be a prosecutor.

To be doing criminal defense work,while employed as a prosecutor has at least the appearance of impropriety.

It is OT, but look at SpywareTerminator.
not that they do not have other problems, but the
crawler toolbar is still an albatross for them,and this long
after Crawler is supposed to have reformed.

 

Two things
1) understable, not good, but as worse as their competitors

b) What a marketing misser, let me explain

SO they issue only a very small number, for $15 each. So for a small profit share they risk to negatively associate their other business initiative: security software. Remember they must have invested serious money in developing freeware FW/HIPS/AV.

So in stead of seeking public attention/free publicity with the fact that other companies show bad practise/have bad company norms and values. They could have had a massive USP as being the only trusthworthy company in that field. After all it is only a small income of te Comodo company those DV certificates!

Imagine what a nice scoop this would be for PC magazines, on-line magazines and possibly even popular tabloids?

Comodo can change their tag line, from making available security for everyone to applying web / e-business deciet for everyone!

Boy the marcom department of Comodo is really a bunch of empty heads.
a) profit of being as bad as the competitors is problably less then the investements made in CIS (scenario being as bad as the competition, can damage our investments in CIS)
b) value of free publicity problably exceeds loss of income of those DV certificates (scenario Comodo being more thrustworthy as its competitors)

 

lmao?

Comodo jumps into the practice of issuing security certificates to MALWARE DOMAINS, just because it wants a share of the big buck$$$ that VeriSign and GoDaddy were raking in from doing so. Instead of being the one CV company that refuses to consort with malware writers, Comodo decides that the $$$ is more important. Very innocent and online trust-building indeed.

I'm looking forward to the comedy that their clown of a CEO is inevitably going to spew out to justify his company's actions.

 

Eice that is the stupid thing about it, Comodo only issues few DV certificates! So it is not for big bugs, but for change money.

 

Then again, sometimes you really have to wonder. The malware guys are making money by the truckload, and I don't think they'd hesitate to pay "special" rates for a certificate for their domain.

Wonder what's coming next: D+ subtly allowing malware by default, and Comodo getting paid for each installation?

 

Simple. Just have Melih take the grandstand, claim that it's a bug in D+, and dramatically promise that it'll be "looked into" and "fixed immediately in the next version". Or just have him spew whatever crap he wants, or even threaten to sue Avira/MBAM/SAS, it's not like the Comodo fanboys have ever doubted whatever outlandish poo he spouts anyway.

Meh, hopefully someone else going to continue posting Melih's responses here or link to them. I'm kind of not enjoying the idea of having to wade into the Comodo forums to get my dose of Melih comedy.

 

https://forums.comodo.com/general_d...own_malware-t39564.0.html;msg286775#msg286775

https://forums.comodo.com/general_d...own_malware-t39564.0.html;msg286782#msg286782

The problem is people don't understand and buy DV.. That's why Comodo put themselves on that channel so that they can catch DV buyers and try to educate them. This is why you see Comodo has so little DV certs out there.

www.ccssforum.org that Comodo Set up, Will be a great forum for Vendors to help mitigate these issues. Because atm, There is NO communication between Vendors, likes of AV Vendors and CA's.

Cheers,
Josh

 

SSL certificates do not mean the site is good or bad. They mean that the site identifies itself properly. What goes on the site - the content - is beyond the CA.

However, some CA can have additional policies, just like hosting providers can have policies regarding porn, malware, gambling, etc. Some allow it, some don't.

The fact you connect to a site named https://whatever and it is properly digitally signed, this means you're at the right site. This means that if you are going to provide sensitive info, you are going to do that against the server you expect, this rules out phishing and identity theft and whatnot.

For example, you wanna buy some adult material online at site xxx - you go there, fill your shopping cart and proceed to payment. You want the payment method to be secure, encrypted and against a validated server. Someone has to validate that server, even if you morally object to adult material.

Personally, I think it would be nice if companies validated the domains they sell the certificates to, including content etc ... but in a way this hurts the freedom of speech and whatnot. For example, can a racist site be allowed to have an SSL certificate?

Whatever the moral choice, there is the user at the end:

- You go to sites you want, no one forces you.
- You download programs from sites you want, no one forces you.
- You install programs you want, no one forces you.

I saw a link to some http site earlier with some antivirus 2009 or something. First, http is not a secure site by definition. Second, why go there in the first place and download the program? An entirely user's fault.

Nevertheless, the recent bout of ask toolbar and this certainly do not help Comodo credibility in the long run. But there is no easy money. Some people just forget that.

Mrk

 

I suggest people to read over my posts carefully in this thread, To understand this situation.

Josh

 

THANK YOU!

Anyway I'll stop my post here as I posted enough information. And Thanks again Mrk for clarifying further. Anyone have any other issues regarding this issue, even when they read my posts, can PM me.

Cheers,
Josh