Comodo froze my computer

I just decided to try Comodo after reading lots of good stuff about it. I have XP Pro SP2 and use KAV 2006 and PG 3.15. No other security programs running. I have never had Norton products on this computer or any firewall other than the Windows firewall which is disabled.

I disabled PG for the Comodo install. I was asked to reboot and upon rebooting I was greeted with 5 popups from Comodo. I was rather taken aback to put it mildly. I assumed that Comodo would not start on the reboot but that I would start it manually and learn about it and configure it and then reboot to have it running properly.

I tried to read the first popup and saw there were four under it and intended to just click ok on all of them but couldn't. The computer was frozen. I brought up Task Manager and actually had Task Manager freeze..never had that happen before. CPU usage was at 65%. I finally had to resort to the button on the tower to shut down.

I rebooted into safe mode and uninstalled Comodo.

I was quite surprised with the entire experience since I had read a lot of positive comments before I decided to try it. Does Comodo not get along with KAV 2006? PG was still disabled so I don't think that was the problem.

 

With me, I got, needed to stop avast antivirus providers and start them to have internet access.
Another time I uninstalled PG first, then installed Comodo. Internet worked for a while, but then not. Needed a reboot and then worked a while, 5 hours or so maybe. Then a reboot again was needed to able to surf with browsers. Something to do with DHCP or avast's webshield maybe, but not something a newbie should be bothered about.

It was I needed to check it out cause all this hype. I am perfectly satisfied with kerio 2.1.5 (even though it does not alone sure pass much leaktests).
I had no other fw's installed same time or any. So it was an interesting try, hehe.

Mele20, the fact that you run Vista might have something to do with your problem too.
EDIT
It was not Vista I see, sorry for reading too fast your post.
Anyways, I think there is something in Comodo. It is advertised as a newbie friendly firewall and all, just was not working as well as I wanted almost out of box. Memory and CPU usage was not over excessive with me. Not a bloat, but still used a good amount that latest release I tested.

 

Depending on one's configuration, this sort of thing can be a problem with Comodo upon initial installation, as the default ruleset may not yet be enough to cover a wide-range of possibilities. It is too bad you did not dig a little deeper into what caused the freezeups. You could have checked the logs for some clues. It may have been a dhcp connection was required at that time or svchost was trying to establish a dns lookup..whatever. There are so many possible reasons for the freezing.

I have found that with Comodo - especially set to "Very High" alert level - that it is necessary to go in and manually configure many of the rules so that the pop-ups are reduced to a bare minimum. This is just my experience. Firefox, for instance, tends to crash (look for one or firefox.exe processes after closing it) unless the rules for it have been completed. This tends to be the case with other apps as well.

Maybe if Comodo can come up with a ruleset that covers a broader range of configurations, this sort of thing could be virtually eliminated.

 

Remember guys that no matter what COMODO and their "legionnaires" say this firewall is kind of a BETA program as new releases are constantly sent out. Soon it'll look like ZoneAlarm free.

I find this fw still buggy.

Not discrediting this product but you now real free quality firewalls belong to the past (thinking here of Sygate and Kerio 2.1.5). I might be wrong though.

 

In the same way that all Microsoft products are betas?

 

Originally posted by Mele20

Consider yourself lucky on that regard.

 

Going back on topic,...

There are some problems with KAV6 and other firewalls, there is some info at the Kaspersky forums here

 

I posted in PG forum, KAV and Comodo as well as this thread. What I learned was that PG is incompatible with Comodo and KAV 2006 also is likely incompatible.

I suggested to Comodo that they and DiamondCS should work together to clear up the incompatibilites. The response was that after 3.0, Comodo would have an HIPS and I would not need PG any longer. That cinched it for me. No Comodo. I wanted a firewall not the kitchen sink. I don't use KIS for the same reason. I dislike Suites. I don't want to put all my eggs in one basket. I like layered security and I expected Comodo and DiamondCS to work together to fix the problem ...same with Kaspersky and Comodo but that apparently isn't going to happen.

I really am becoming alarmed at the trend toward nothing but Suites in security software. I think that is really to the detriment of the consumer except for the naive newbie/average user who thinks the suite is an easy answer to everything.

 

Mele20
I agree with what you say. There is a trend towards program suites. I think many of the new PC owners want a simplified approach to setting up their machine. They don't have the time to browse and research all of the myriad program offerings available. So many of the software companies package several programs to make it easier to get a new user up and running. A lot of the ads from the local computer stores only offer suites (which I don't personally like). Webroot which makes Spy Sweeper was selling its firewall along with that program in a recent ad (free after rebate promotion). The firewall is very basic and actually doesn't stealth all of your computer ports and has always ranked at the bottom when compared with other firewalls. However, a newbie user won't think twice and just install both programs.

When I see how programs are getting bigger, I ask myself, are they really improving the program or just adding more code to make it do something else for which it was not originally intended?

 

Mele20 and ccsito,
Count me in too. I do not like Suites either. .

So far my Comodo FW is working well with AOL AVS. They play nicely no conflicts or freezes.

I too am very alarmed at the way Suites are just taking over like termites eating away at system resources.

 

mercurie,
You may have already seen in a prior thread, but AOL AVS has compatibility issues with KAV and SKPF firewall programs so you might get problems if you decide to switch later.

 

Aol AVS and comodo play very well also ghost security suite awesome combo ! Just be sure to use the aol AVS for scanning only and disable the other features, aol AVS really sinks itself into your system, drivers etc...

 

Well, if you disable ProActive Defense which is the second Major reason to use KAV or AVS in the first place...then I suppose there would be no conflict. But why would anyone want to disable ProActive Defense?

 

Maybe because you already are running something that covers this. I use Prevx and have disabled the KAV Proactive. Why duplicate things. I'm not keen on too much overlap, and KAV Proactive + Prevx would be too much of the same thing IMHO.

muf

 

Why do people make a distinction with suites and individual applications saying the individual applications are 'layered' while suites are 'bloated'?
A suite is as much a 'layered' approach, by definition, as seperate apps and to automatically assume suite = bloated and inferior is naive imo.

There are plus and minuses on both sides. A suite is guaranteed to work together whereas, as has been seen in this thread and countless others on Wilders and elsewhere, individual apps can cause conflicts. Some conflicts are readily apparent and therefore alert the user that there is a problem and obviously a hole in their security since one or more application are not working correctly. But what of other, less apparent conflicts, that compromise users machines without the users knowledge until someone spots it?

As a suite gets upgraded/improved over the months and years you still have a conflict free security suite whereas individual apps may work together for months or years until one of them is changed slightly causing conflict where previously there was harmony. This means the user either has to wait for both companies to sort out the conflicts, in the meanwhile with compromised security, or look around for another app to replace one of the conflicting ones. You don't get full use of a license in this case and have to buy another app.

The bottom line is any suite that works well and does the job is better than the best seperate apps that cause conflicts.

 

Sorry, think you missed the point entirely. Bloat vs layered is not what we are saying. The main advantage layered has over Suite is that if some malware takes out your suite then that's it. All protection gone! Where as with a layered approach there is a much bigger possibility that one or more of your apps don't get taken 'down'. That way you have a better chance of 'remaining protected'. In a nutshell. A suite means you have(how they say it) Put all your eggs in one basket.

I agree there is stability issue's using the 'layered' approach. But then that is the reason you test and trial. And if something does get updated and becomes a 'conflict' then you look for an alternative that does a similar job. But the advantage far outweighs the negatives. In that you remain less vulnerable to having all you protection disabled. Plus you get to pick and choose each and every layer. You are not stuck say with a good firewall but rubbish AV, or a good firewall, AV and rubbish Antispyware. With layered, you pick, choose and get the best of everything!!!

muf

 

Thanks for the info muf. What suites have been taken out by malware?

 

My guess is "none".

 

I see the question regarding compatability problems between Process Guard and Comodo (in the official Process Guard support forum) has still had no official response despite it being a full month since the question was asked.

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=143995

Is this one of the advantages of going with the layered approach having to post questions in several different forums to try and get to the bottom of the problem and find which of your multi layered apps is responsible?

 

What suites have been taken out by malware? Does it actually matter? What malware targets today may not be the same tomorrow. You are using one line of defence. I personally don't like that strategy. I prefer multi lines of defence. Get past one, get past two, get past three etc. That's my preference. I'm certainly not telling you to change. If your suite works, never gets taken down and you remain secure then i'm on your side. But as i said, i'm not prepared to put all my eggs in one basket. It's personal choice. And i was only providing an insight to what the real differences between suites and layers is. As far as i'm concerned it's certainly not Bloat vs Layered.

muf

 

Err...no, not usually. DiamondCS has been rather unresponsive across the board in the last six months. Melih answered my posts almost immediately in the Comodo forum and confirmed there is a conflict and gave a nice, lengthy explanation. But I don't want to give up PG (obviously if I didn't really like it with the situation as has been for months now regarding DiamondCS and support I would have given it up some time ago). I wanted to use both. If I can't then I will stay with PG. (Plus, I still think my problem is KAV not PG and I am sure not going to give up KAV or disable ProActive Defense which I suspect is where the conflict is located).