Any FREE FW that has OA paid version protection?

If ever there was a thread title guaranteed to descend into an 'A is better than B' shoutfest this was surely it.

 

1.) you can, no harm
2.) DEP prevents code execution in heap and stack on a CPU level, CIS prevents code execution in heap and stack, but a code needs to call some API that is hooked by CIS first. So I'd say CIS does 50% of what DEP does (in the best case). The most dangerous BOs rewrite the code instead of injecting it to a heap or stack, and here the both (DEP and CIS) are helpless. I think this is impossible to prevent all the types of BOs, at least I know of none tool that could do it. The only really effective approach against BO is SandBox-like approach, which is to limit risky applications in what they can do even being attacked. Running risky application with reduced rights also helps much. But running Risky application protected by CMF with admin rights is not too effective protection. Everybody should realize that any BO protection can be bypassed in very many ways.

 

thanks for the explanation. Hopefully GeSWall or Sandboxie could prevent these types of BO.

Ice

 

I do not think they can prevent BO, but they can prevent a harm that BO attack can cause to your system by reducing system changes SandBoxed program is allowed to do.

 

Thanks But I didn't realise when I started this post it would be 5+ pages long

 

CIS fast and some tight protection where as PIS seems to allow more to access to some it's not coded to detect. I did get false positive with CIS though with WinRAR icons bmp/jpg saving it was dirty malware. Other than that it seem to be doing it's job. I am not into all-in-one but I am looking to keep the system low on system resources and another issue is that these pest are getting smarter.

OA program I can't use that one but I am sure others here can... It had a nice information display I just had to many issues with OA free. Never tried the pro though.

 

Mike,

No need to call names. Doesn’t suit a CEO of a company who is providing security. I have respect for everyone, and ANY company - Off course it is their decision to use other products, EVERYONE has their right to do so. Though for now on, I will NOT comment on Alex's comment's about Comodo either any FURTHER - Because I know they are not true (BO Protection especially) based on facts from the Comodo developer who developed the BO Protection in the first place.

I did tests, I said its public, I invited everyone to contribute, if you are disputing the results then more than happy to have your contribution but PLEASE without the name calling and insults. I really hope you will appreciate my desire to continue in this engagement but please keep it professional.

Cheers,
Josh

 

If someone is secure in their belief in something, then they won't get defensive, even if someone challenges something about it.

There is no need to name call and insult. Let's all be sensible, mature about this.

Nothing wrong with raising issues, concerns, challenges towards OA or any other product. It reveals a persons maturity and belief in a product if they maturely accept comments without getting defensive and childish about it.

I personally lose respect for any person that exposes a low self-esteem, insecurity and insults just because some dare to challenge their product.

 

As I said in the Comodo Topic and my previous post, If anyone, even Mike, wishes to contribute to this test, he is more then welcome to.

Cheers,
Josh

 

Funny, I agree with you 100% but from the 5 pages of posts in this thread Mike has can definitely hold his high. As for the Comodo folks I cannot say the same.

 

Hello,

It is obvious there is no intention of getting back to a topic that is at least close to the topic title.

Play time is over on this one,


Thread Closed.

- Stem