Comodo Antivirus

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Kees1958, Aug 1, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
  2. tipstir

    tipstir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Posts:
    830
    Location:
    SFL, USA
    Firewall is top dog here, would be nice if the AV/malware could be the same. Like to keep the system resources as low as I can... No CPU peaks in the scale.
     
  3. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    You can find a lot of setup post in regard to D+ on wilders from me. My posts on D+ are based om my preference AND experience.

    What D+ lacks currently
    a) an option to set one of the predefined rulesset as default after an intrusion
    (now you will allways get the ruleset of the predefined install option, being CIS, AV, FW or Pro-active). F.I. I have a program given limited rule set. When it triggers one of teh few left ASK rules, it will get a new set of the much more relaxed D+ pro-active (or even worse AV rules set with al lot of allows where it used to had deny).

    b) a general option in the D+ settings : Protect Kernel/System objects against direct, suspicious interprocess access from non-system objects. Systems objects are by default rule allowed a lot. So it is not smart to increase D+ granularity based on policies (the predefined rules set with loser rights). When you losing things up, you always want your core system to be protected. Comodo should take an example of Outpost which has its rules sets grouped this way (system intrusion, NT, Win32)

    Bottem line
    1) Comodo provides a very good freebie :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
    2) is not as good a power user tool as it fans say (see a and b) :blink:
    3) have a stand up comedian as CEO :D
    4) release finals when other companies would still consider it a RC (Egemenn is even happy to announce "to solve a lot of bug fixes, minor functionality changes" HELLO - you are telling your quality management/testing procedure sucks). :argh:

    Cheers
     
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2009
  4. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    Yes, that is my point also. I do not need a full fletched HIPS, just some basic protection against direct access, kernel objects, and file and registry protection to deal with social engineering user errors.
     
  5. Wildest

    Wildest Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2009
    Posts:
    304
    Well done, Kees.
    That is why it is such a pleasure to browse this forum compared to some others; objectivity lives here.

    Of course there will always be the occasional brown-nosing user with questionable motives, but overall, you can find the truth, here.

    I like the use of the phrase, "very good freebie" from 1, and 2 in general. ;)
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.