Kerio 2.1.5 (w/BZ) or Kerio 4.x free (w/BZ) or Comodo

I've been seeing so many positives about the Comodo firewall and was wondering:

Which is more effective (i.e., stops trojans, prevents leaks, etc.) and efficient (i.e., low CPU utilization, moderate memory usage (less concerened about this, within reason), doesn't cause BSODs and/or conflicts, etc.):

Kerio 2.1.5 (with BZ's enhanced ruleset) or
Kerio 4.x free (with BZ's enhanced ruleset) or
Comodo 2.x

I know there are many variables included within this question and answer (i.e., what else are you running, behind a NAT firewall, experience level of the user and how they respond to firewall prompts, etc.) but wanted to see what people think and if there is any empirical evidence to support recommendations/answers.

Thanks for everyone's input.

 

If you're after a leak-stopper then Comodo is probably the best bet. If you want light, then definitely Kerio 2. Most likely you can have one or the other, but not both in one firewall. I'm not sure what the resource usage of Comodo is, but I would bet it's nowhere near Kerio 2's 5mb ram and 0% cpu. Kerio 4 lies somewhere in between the other 2 I guess. It eats around 26mb ram on my machine, and it probably doesn't cover the leaks as well as Comodo. BSOD's and problems will always be highly machine specific. One firewall may run like a champ on your PC but BSOD on mine, so it's hard to generalize on that aspect of things..

 

I'm not going to go into detail, but using 4x with my ruleset is not as simple as it may of sounded as certain options need to be disabled in 4x which actually bypass the default filtering, which I'm unsure of all the changes anymore. Also the locations, and how things work like the customer address group is handled very differently now. That ruleset was made back in 2002-2003 when the beta/1.0 versions were out for Kerio 4x, so anyone who tries it should backup the default configuration so if you have issues you can just start over from the default settings if things don't work out.

From my time with 4x, which is a bit biased as I was tired of Kerio not fixing serious bugs like the logging issues before they they started to charge money for it, I still don't like the program, and its memory usage is horrendus in my opinion even if the other parts of the program are disabled as people didn't want to get a key after 30 days.

I do suggest if you don't think your prepared to spend the time to learn how to use the rules correctly you might as well stick to the application based filters, and even possibly the default settings in 4x, kind of like how ZoneAlarm works which has been proven much easier for beginners.

Good luck on whatever program you choose, and remember rules are not something that are just specific to one program, some programs might work differently which would need to be compensated for, however rules of this nature are something I've been using over the years on other rule based firewalls also.

 

I don't have any imperical evidence, but i personally prefer kerio 2.1.5 to comodo. I switched adn tried at comodo a for a few weeks and just didn't like it. It did a good job but there were some settings i just couldn't figure out how to set that were quite easy with kerio 2.1.5. With this said, Comodo has more features than kerio 2.1.5 but also uses more memory. Kerio 2.1.5 is lighter but is only a basic firewall. I know a lot of people say this, but just try them both out and see which interface you prefer. Both are capable firewalls. I also have no idea about kerio 4. Hope this helps...

 

What bout older versions of ZA free/ Tiny firewall? They are good? and what are the resource use by them?
Any ideas?

 

How about new versions of ZA free? I mean, I don't trust Tiny for a beginner, but you can also use Sunbelt Kerio Personal Firewall for free after 30 days with some limitations (you will still get no problems after 30 days). You can try and test them, but be sure to leave no tracks after uninstalling. I am using Outpost though .

 

Why?
BTW, tried ZA and takes much time to load on start up.

 

Comodo is probably the better one imo. Although it does use a moderate amount of resources.

 

I like Comodo better than any of the Kerio versions and I have used the 2.xx and 4.xx Kerios.
As far as Comodo's memory usage-I have a little less than 23,000k for cpf.exe and cmdagent.exe has around 14,250k usage according to Windows Task Manager on XP Home edition.Bear in mind that I disabled startup of Comodo Launch Pad.

 

We have a version out next week (fingers crossed) with much reduced mem usage (under 20 meg in total).

Melih

 

Oh really! that,s so nice.
I just wish to have an option of selectively disabling the componant monitoring for any application. Each time my AV updates, I get pop ups of unknown components. If there is such an option I can disable component monitoring selectively for avagent to get rid of these pop ups.
Also I really think that launch pad should be just optional at least.

 

Melih,
Glad to hear of the new lighter version due out.
Aigle's idea regarding Launch Pad as optional is a great idea!

 

For the purpose of varied input on Comodos resource usage, I tried Comodo for a few weeks on my old Thinkpad T23. Pentium M 1.2 with 512 megs, XPpro. It was bouncing around 24-28 megs.

 

Indeed.
We asked our users in our forums what they wanted for the launchpad and optional launchpad is the strongest vote from users. so we will be implementing that soon.

Melih

 

If this new release does come out next week, is it going to be Beta? Thank you.

 

It will beta for for a very short time! (no more than a week or two) then we will do the full release!

Melih

 

Great, and thank you. Not only for your reply, but for a very fine and constantly improving FREE Firewall as well.

 

Any comments about option for seletively disabling compomemet monitoring for any application?

Thanks.

 

I have used Kerio 2.1.5 for a couple of months. It is very light & works very effectively on protecting against outgoing stuff, which is primarily what I use it for. (I have a router for the incoming.)

Because of al the good comments about Comodo, my curiosity was aroused so I tried it the other day. I hated Comodo's registration/activation folderol -- reminded me of a M$ application -- but I jumped through their hoops & got it up & running.

Then I subjected Comodo to Comodo's own leak test, which involved downloading an exe to see if Comodo would block it from sending a trojan-type message. I also tried a couple of the other leak tests.

Comodo never got to show its abilities because my paid version of System Safety Monitor (SSM) blocked everything the leak tests threw at my computer before Comodo ever had a chance to do so. Ergo, I concluded that to *fairly* test Comodo I would have to disable SSM. But why in the world should I do that? I certainly wouldn't do such a thing for the *real world* so why should I cripple my security to test another security app?

So I kept SSM, uninstalled Comodo, & reinstalled Kerio 2.1.5. I feel quite secure with my SSM/Kerio combo. This does not say that Comodo isn't an excellent firewall. I'm sure it is. But it does show that there are more ways to plug the leaks than a firewall.

I am totally sold on HIPS as a first line of defense (Online Armor, SSM, Prevx, et alia)! In that context, I believe that Kerio 2.1.5 is an excellent firewall.

 

Do you know/think the free version of System safety monitor would have blocked those leak tests as well? The listing on the SSM site says for many of the features that the free version only has "basic" protection but I am not sure what that means.

Thanks.

roark37