COMODO Internet Security 5.3.174622.1216 Released!

Now is the HIPS? don't you know that the HIPS does not produce popups anymore?
You don't need to deal with it.

Anything else?

I guess with overkill you mean independent and not overlap layers of protection?
If you mean really mean overkill I guess that all the security products are overkill according to you special criteria since all of them has different layers of protection

 

Huh I just tried CIS again last night, and D+ (HIPS) still produces it's share of pop-ups.

 

main point is a classical HIPS is overkill and not really needed, and is most certainly not an efficient way of keeping a clean system, nor will it ever catch on.

 

Since I installed CIS 5 I have only seen real HIPS popups (popups related with the monitoring settings of the HIPS) with some malware.
Maybe you mean this popups that ask you that "the file is trying to.... if you want to run it on the sandbox or not" that appears with some unknown programs.

So simple, if your opinion is that the HIPS is overkilling deactivate it, your particular problem is gone. Right click on the icon -> defense+ -> Disable
Or even better in D+ settings -> Deactivate D+ permanently (I dont know if this one disable also the sandbox)

 

Give it just 1 or 2 days and you will see results (You can't have a Classical HIPS that will not ask a single thing, does that even sounds right for a Classical HIPS?)
Of course it will still ask, but after it settles down with all your programs, it's a breeze

 

Posts removed to keep the thread on topic.

 

The intelligence I was referring to was that to be found within the products themselves rather than any possessed by the various developers, however the two are likely to be closely related.
This "intelligence" is the ability of the software to work out a reasonable course of action for itself, having made some sort of "sense" of the connected or unconnected events that have just occurred in the Windows OS.

CIS started as an unintelligent HIPS with a poor AV. "Don't worry if the AV is no good, D+ will always keep you safe." was the catch-cry. By which of course they meant the user responding to the D+ alert would keep you safe!

This is by no means a criticism of CIS. It was a great alternative for people who liked being intimately involved in (nearly) every decision their security software made.

CIS has moved on. Extra detection components have been added and the AV is much more competent. However still today, sometimes a file assessed by Comodo's AV lab as "safe", will be run "partially limited" when executed, and if this file requires administrator privileges to work in XP, it won't work.
One can of course add it to the "trusted files" list and move on (until the next time ).
Again, for some, this hyper-vigilant lack of integration may be part of CIS's appeal. But I suspect not for the majority.

Now (only because you asked the question) as far as the developers are concerned, intelligence may be exercised as much in deciding not to include features (a) not fully developed, (b) not properly debugged, and/or (c) not sufficiently integrated, into an already acceptable product. Getting one's own innovation into the release product might well be a buzz for the developer, but a zero-sum improvement in customer satisfaction due to unforeseen consequences will likely be judged a failure by the marketing department.

Hope that makes sense to someone.

 

@Vladimyr, I agree with you in most of it, the problem is that if you want the best protection with the technology of nowadays the user friendly can not be the best one.

The AV component has been improved a lot, just check the last AVtest.org report, Comodo improve a +5% each month, but probably is still not in the top5.

Since the sandbox was release D+ is in a second plane, now I would say according to my experience that the 95% of the popups are from the sandbox or related with it, not from the HIPS. And I get less that a couple of popups every week installing some not common software.

There are plenty of Security products failing continuously using this intelligence that you mention, Comodo is a free alternative to all this mediocrity, is less user friendly? ok, but still does not have any real competitor, avast is around the corner.

I want comodo like it's now, I don't want them to become into another mediocre security product missing new malware everyday just to be at the same level of usability and protection than their competitors.

You can say, then Comodo is not for eveybody, ok maybe not, but Comodo development team is worried about giving the best protection for free, not to increase the sales, like the others.

Anyway with the future release of DACS, and some new features that they are working now, the usability will be improved in future versions, I think that until now has been their 1st priority, all the changes since Comodo 3.14 has been gone in that direcction.

*

 

As i said once,i have licenses for 4 big AV names....tried them all of course,but still...i use CIS complete suite.I will not lie and i must say that i watch with much interest all kind of official tests,but by no means i will choose my PC security after them,after their results.Never.

 

http://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/results.php

 

*facepalm*...

 

and thats only version 4.0

 

Hahahaha relax

I wonder when Comodo will release another version, it's the first time i've seens them not release enything for so long

 

this is a very stable version so far..

 

Comodo has improved there whitelist i guess...i havent got any squeak till now

 

Their whitelist is huge now
I prefer having it all turned off

 

They have, but it's still not good enough. They have to accelerate the whitelisting process a bit to achieve proper results.

 

I still get the random windows system file D+ prompt, which really surprises me that they can not fix those.

 

Fair point.
It's heading in the right direction but there's no room for complacency.

 

Been using CIS 5.3 for some time now after short break, real pleasure to be back, working perfect as always.
Firewall, D+ and Sandbox.
AV turned off ( I don't see a point having AV with all those features enabled)

 

The question is, does turning off AV save any resources? Not that I can tell. Also it still seems to download the sigs.

 

I guess it does, by that I don't mean RAM usage, but overall performance.
That's just my logic, perhaps I'm wrong.

First I started by just installing firewall , with D+ and Sandbox disabled.
Then after few days I enabled those two and rebooted.

So, AV was not opted at all during installation, I can tell you that it does not downloading sigs for sure.
I don't even have Antivirus tab in GUI.

Maybe it still downloads sigs with AV feature installed but disabled afterward.
Really can't tell that.

 

For me, CIS uses the same resource usage (ram, disk, cpu) no matter what components I have enabled. Even if I close the program, the ram drops a bit, but it still uses a lot of disk i/o, as a process keeps running.

With that said, the program is pretty light overall. Can't really complain in terms of resource usage.

 

The AV has stopped a lot in my use. Personally I wouldn't disable it. It's a great part of the suite in my opinion.

 

Sure, I have no doubts that it's light and running smooth.
I just don't run any AV , don't feel a need for one, been with Prevx for a while but that was silly adventure.
I'll probably add AV part soon and see how system performs with it.

btw having Cloud scanner enabled , isn't that the same thing (signature wise) as having AV part installed , sure I understand that cloud can protect only if there is internet connection and that there are no scheduled scans (or any scans), but detection wise, everything else is the same ?