Nothing Compatible With Comodo Firewall

hey pete..thnx for the reply and tests..

what a security configuration have u got there..!!

i remember every time i wanted to run the CLT , GData had quarantined the CLT.exe !! and the test remained undone..

but it's really hard to achieve the whole score ( 340 ) which was possible by KIS & NIS with advanced configurations.
however , since the clt is going to act as a malware in some cases , causes the AV products flaggin it as a high potentially unwanted program.

 

that is normal

Yes, mostly products with HIPS or strong BB can achieve 340

 

absolutely.

right now im testing ESS 6 beta... if we assume ESS has HIPS ( ) or just a whitewashing !!
I dont ignore Esset's artificial intelligence but at this leak test it su...!!

sorry for the inconvenience sir..


with respect.

 

i consider CTL as a merchandising tool for comodo - no more. in any way i tried it it gave me not more than 240/360 points - and that was inside a limited sandbox/no net. ridiculous.

ctl only shows up whats possible - but not whats present ITW.

 

I tried to download the Comodo leaktest but F-Prot blocked and quarantined it. Thinks it's malware or whatever.

 

CLT must not be ran under a virtualized/sandbox environment, and must be added to the exclusions of the AV, if i remember it is a hips/firewall test.

 

why should i exclude a test tool from (my) test conditions? lol?

 

in order to know how good your HIPS and Behaviour Blocker can be..no matter you exclude it but again malicious behavior even in a trusted file when you are using HIPS would b blocked .. HIPS doesn't check if the app is placed in which group ( trusted or unknown ) at the first run.. i figured this out in one of BD foroums..
first you allow the CLT to start then if u got a robust HIPS it will prompt for every little stealthy job that CLT is gonna do..and u should block them all..and considering that during the HIPS job , u should uncheck any "remember action" and also "terminate application"

here is my today test :

http://myup.ir/images/95375666167542384272.png

Online Armor HIPS + kaspersky proactiv

with respect

 

Online Armor did a good job i would say - i know that product as a formerly
known registered user i am able to handle such software.
If i block execution of unknown files surely 100% are possible

the point for me is that CLT wants me to use a better security product, in ideal comodo.
next point for me is - am i capable to handle such a product above default settings?

the essential for me is that TO wants a comparable program like comodo but
such software aint comparable although it behaves similar.
is set and forget the same? what about experience? i have met lots of people
now which stood still with their present software for years. just minor updates.

like cars got more developed it should be here the same - more airbags.
and a car is secure how good its driver is - like user at a pc.

your example - you need really two products to gain 340/340?

BTW please stop writing in blue, use default colors for writing - blue on blue is vs readability
and you forgot people which are colour-blind - there is not only red and green, there is more.

 

Online Armor does 340/340 by itself.

 

i totally agree. even the best security suit needs a good handler.. comodo as an example, if u r not familiar with the settings u probably would b failed once at least.

if u are an advanced user i somehow believe there is no that much need of security suits.. most of viruses nowadays are using shell which can b only triggered with autorun.inf nothing else !! blocking this file ... that's just what u need to do !! of course stuxnet and duqu used different factors.
anyways..

as our friend said EOA is enough for acquiring this result.
and also kaspersky can obtain almost 330 i guess..
in kaspersky case mostly proactiv involves.. which i heard in 2013 version is removed along with safe run and is combined with system watcher and HIPS.
Online armor got a really strong HIPS.

u mean its not good ?

OK ! im just kidding :d

u know i used to use navy blue for all forums and it is just outta my control can u believe it ? i just dunno why.. but i like navy blue.

with respect.

 

navy blue is a nice color - i like blue in general

myself generated a bbcode color table (web safe) for forums with their backgrounds, some are beautiful, others totally awful. Best background wouldbe black, but black is evil or bad - doh
i appreciate you change

BTT

nice to read they improved this feature. anyway - no friend of mine

best hips ever i would say. and more than comparable with comodo firewall.
next i would suggest online armor and outpost (both paid).
* online armor free has also strong features

answering the topic question this would be my answer - from my experience.
antivirus what he likes. as long i try to separate security software for flexibility
i had best of both working or testing.

meanwhile i retired from heavy testing, after that journey i returned back to my
favorite and combined it with something new and small. (see my logo)

 

omg.. CoOl..

thnx sir..

neither friend of mine im just testin it !!

agree.. but i think CFW provided a better GUI.. my third opinion as u said would b outpost..

best regards

 

I've only been testing Comodo's firewall on my XP Pro SP3 system for about a week now but it has been running flawlessly alongside both Emsisoft Anti-Malware and Malwarebytes Pro with very low resource usage.

 

Has the problem with the comodo firewall and avast 7 web shield been solved yet?

 

LOL!!!
comodo cfp is never that high on my computer.
At the moment it is using 3mb.

 

It's not just Comodo, it has the same problem with Windows firewall too, and in my experience, several other 3rd party firewalls that I've tried.

Uninstall the web shield and your problem will be solved.

 

Neither on mine with Panda Cloud for example,as i have it now.But with Avast unfortunately...40-50% CPU as i said.And damn,i love this combo...