comodo firewall pro vs online armor free

hi this is my first post and i joined wilder security because i found it the best security forum,i want to know from you guys what is better in your opinion online armor free or comodo firewall pro

i know that onlinearmor scored 89% and comodo scored 95% at matousec.com
but i wanted to know your opinion

 

my vote is comodo

 

I don't pay much attention to "leak tests" and the like. I do, however, install software I am considering and try it out myself during the free trial period (software without a free trial period, or with a crippled trial is eliminated from consideration immediately).

Unless the software works for me, on my machine, in a way that I can use it, there is very little point in my running it.

 

i think i am going to stay with comodo as it has fill features unlike the free version of onlinearmor

 

Comodo free for all.

But pay attention that user mode hooks are always working otherwise the keylogger protection is disabled. I suggest you to check with diagnostic after each reboot until comodo may follows my idea to create a anti-unhook mechanism (something like a auto diagnostics guard) to prevent malware from R3 Unhooking.

 

Online armor (formerly Comodo, but too much questions for me)

 

If you want to be Pounded with a bat repeatedly. I would say comodo is your best bet you'll love the popus.

other then that I would say OA its free its fast and they are quick to fix problems.

 

or maybe you should improve your mouse skillzzz.

But no real keylogger protection you always seem to underestimate this fact.

 

This is the kind of statement that kept me from even trialling Comodo for a long time: Well on my system once it is 'TRAINED' it has as many alerts as Look'n'Stop(one of the least intrusive firewalls). Obviously because of its HIPS module if you execute something new it will alert you of the impending operation asking you what to do (any HIPS are espected to do so).

Now whether this is because version 3 is quieter than previous ones, I don't know, but certainly IMO this is a formidable firewall, and despite its complexity it works well for beginners (out of the box) or can be custom configured by experts.

I'm sorry I haven't trialled Online Armour(I run Vista), but I read great things about this firewall.

 

Mods, why is this vs. thread still alive?

 

Apparently AV vs AV is forbidden but not FW vs FW...
(if I understood correctly).

Cheers,
Fax

 

OK, then, I think Comodo should be compared with Pro version of OA...

 

Why?

He asks for a comparison of those because they are free..

 

Yes once it is Trained the part you are leaving out is the Training period never ends... Assumes the Bat whacking position.

 

I agree with this. OA for me.
besides Comodo uses all the time 60-80% resorces of my CPU, OA not and works like a charm.

 

Are you sure?

Newest version of Comodo will score 99% and reach level 10+... if Matousec retest

 

The differense is in keyloggers detection, which is absent in OA free intentionally and which can be hardly regarded as standard firewall part. I dare to say they both provide very high protection level. Usability is what differs. OA Free is more like "set and forget", Comodo is for those who likes to play with the settings and with a system.

 

Anyone remember the days where a Firewall was just that a Firewall. not a jack of all trades that can do everything but stand on its head. people complain about Bloat when it comes to AV's but Firewalls do the exact same thing and people just want more of them and if it don't have every feature under the sun it scores like crap on tests. even if it does its job of a "FIREWALL" Very well.

One thing I have noticed between OA and Comodo that you wont find on any test is the Level of support you get from OA. and the lack there of you get from Comodo.

OA still has my vote any day. also if your that worried about Keyloggers then quit clicking crap you should not. or uninstall your keyboard and go to Voice recognition.

Tho this has just been my Experience. so everyone's may differ.

 

Define bloat.

cfp.exe 5383k peak 12,720
cmdagent.exe 7812k peak 8076

avagent.exe 1138k peak 54,780
avgaurd.exe 2984k peak 72,936

"sas'.exe 460k peak 91,380

2GB RAM

 

Technically speaking peak usage is something that happened once. In general this is pretty tricky task to estimate how much resources takes security software because essential part or resource usage is not visible inside security process, but is distributed among the other processes. For example SSDT hook works in context of the process that invoked a hook. The same with TDI network hooks. And NDIS hooks work in the "System" process context. So do not be misled by the resources security process takes, just because this is the half of all the resources it takes (in the best case).

 

For example to compare with OA v2.1.0.131

oasrv.exe - 8,192K peak 28,208K
oaui.exe - 8,196K peak 12,348K

nice results.

 

At this very moment I'm writing my CPU gives me values of 0%,1%,2%. With Windows firewall as you can imagine it couldn't be lower than these figures. Now I believe what Creer says about his CPU, and that's why it is imperative to trial an application for a while as even equal operating systems respond differently due to different software environments.

A single bad performance has to be supported by many other cases before one can generalize.

 

Having used both firewall/hips, I find you can't go wrong with either. They are both very good. CFP pro you can tweak a little more than OA free. Both offer great protection at a great price. They both run light and work well with other security software. Both forums are pleasant and informative. If you have an issue with their software, someone will usually have an answer in their forums or over here. I use Comodos because I have Vista machines and the free version is not out yet. It also offers keylogger protection.

Ice

 

Voice Recon, now i like that idea. LoL

BTW, used an app named SuiteKeys for Voice Commands in Windows back on 98, pretty intuitive stuff, actually works! You speak, it obeys, reasonably accurate.

Oh, OT.

Those statements quoted above ring a very loud bell with me and is why after using both those Firewall + HIPS i decided to let Kerio 2.15 pull the duties it was always intended for as well as pure HIPS apps as they are designed to be. That combo stuff just fell out of favor with me.

Prefer to let a firewall be a firewall and a HIPS be what it is and so forth. Seems to done the trick. In my research nothing is breached a simple SEPARATE array which included Kerio, EQS, and CyberHawk.

However, to keep pace with this topic, if i was given a choice between the two free apps metioned at the heading of this thread, i probably would choose the one that was given the most attention by it's developers.

 

Comodo's firewall/hips has more of a learning curve than OA. However, it really isn't that hard to know what each of the settings do. Training, Clean PC mode, Safe etc etc.... OA free does it a little differently by letting the user check off that everything on the PC is Safe. This is done at install time. In Comodo, you can select Clean PC mode for the hips, that functions similar, everything already on your PC is safe. As I mentioned in my previous post, you get a bit more tweaking in Comodo than with OA free. But, IMHO you can't go wrong with either.

Ice