Are there any conflicts between AppGuard and Privatefirewall?

My free trial of AppGuard is coming to a close soon, and I'm seriously thinking about purchasing it. However, I wanted to know if there was any conceivable conflict between AppGuard and Privatefirewall before I spent any money.

 

No there shouldn't be. You might have to tweak appguard to allow PrivateFirewall to work properly.

 

Using them together here with no problems on XP.

 

Personally, I wouldn't use them both at the same time.
PF has all that you need....

 

IMHO PF HIPS is weaker than AppGuard.

 

It gives you more control than AG.
And it has firewall.

 

Comodo would be a better option then.
Version 5 in particular plus its a better firewall IMHO.

 

Comodo has one major weakness...its cloud sometimes decides that malware file is safe.

 

Im aware of that and hopefully it will get fixed.
About time they got valkyrie up and running.

I have turned off the cloud function as i just use the superb firewall alone.

 

I don't really think that's the case, but anyway Comodo controls everything what AppGuard controls as well equally good.

 

I disagree.

Comodo spams the user with prompts and AppGuard does not. So they don't control everything equally good. AppGuard is better overall since its ultra strong policy control give no prompts. Comodo is based on behaviour/HIPS which prompts the user for more actions.

Also, so many tests have proven Comodo is bypassed while no test indicate that AppGuard fails.

If AppGuard can be configured to work well with PrivateFirewall, you'll be having a great layered defense when combined with an on-demand scanner. Not sure why anyone would use the HIPS module in PW together with AppGuard though.

 

It was years ago in 3.x and 4.x versions. Now it is rather silent. For a week I have CIS HIPS in "Paranoid" with popups in verbose mode and FW in "Custom" and alert frequency in "Very High". No popup yet.

Sorry for OT. Let's guys adhere to the OP.

Does anybody know any tests from venerable testing companies for AppGuard?

 

Peter and Shedek
I don't buy this because you can configure Comodo as well, Comodo protects everything as we all as AppGuard, the key difference is their methods.
By your own words, this would mean that DefenseWall is also better than Comodo, but not as good as AppGuard, but I still fail to see what's the major difference between AppGuard and AppLocker for example?
for example, when I used AppGuard recently it blocked Cache Cleaner exe to read from CTF loader, I don't know what's the big deal here, really, since without it was just fine and I was never infected.

And I'm sure AppGuard at maximum protection would fail some test, sooner or later... unless you think it's totally impenetrable.

 

I use nothing except Comodo and router protection, I don't need it.

 

You all argue that Comodo is good. I agree, it is good. That's not what we're arguing about. Comodo still prompts the user with more popups and the topic was about AppGuard, which is more silent and super strong together with PW (which plays the same role as Comodo does). Comodo is not the option for the author.

 

At least you know what are you doing, I wouldn't know what to do and how most likely, despite I like to dig very deep, this is why I had to re-install my computer several times.
My bad.
But I still don't know how that beats Comodo's protection, sure I wouldn't mind if AppGuard is more secure than any other security option we have today, but if we judge only by pop ups, than it's wrong approach really.
If Comodo's Defense plus catches everything like Appguard does the difference being only pop ups, than I don't see any difference.

I use Comodo long enough to know what I can allow or block (at least that i know for sure).
If I ever change my security approach, most likely it would like yours currently, AppGuard and NoVirusThanks exe Pro (without firewall since router does all the job), however right now I'm just fine with this approach.
Thanks for your input.

 

Read my response to Peter, I think I said it right.