COMODO Internet Security 6.3.294583.2937 Released!

Is it OK on your windows 8?

 

I'm running it on Windows 8.1 without problems.

 

The problem was not in Comodo, but somewhere else. (Sorry, Comodo guys. You can go home now to spend the rest of the weekend with kids. Mea culpa.)

I tried restoring another image that was made the same day, almost identical Win8 system but before I added Comodo. It won't update either. So it's not about Comodo. Dunno what was the other guy's problem, who reported similar problems in this thread, though. I'd be interested to hear what it was about, if you'll find out the reason.

But in my system, it's either some glitch in Windows or malfunctioning fsarchiver that made Windows images that seem to work ok, but refuse to update. Or perhaps a hard disk error or something.

(After updates during the last few months, fsarchiver, in Clonezilla, has given errors for hard links, that I have thought to be about increasing number of links in Windows 8 system. Because everything has seemed to work anyway, I haven't tried to find out if I'd have increase some memory space or whatever by modifying fsarchiver options, or resume to lower compression levels or something. Lately fsarchiver has also given a few errors for... reg files I think..)

Edit:
For those interested, updater working super slowly (listed some updates after waiting for several hours) was caused by fsarchiver imaging program not being able to handle some files after recent windows updates. It seems to appear in some Windows 7 systems too (and I remember when making images lately in Win7 systems, getting similar errors, but systems still seemed to work).
With Win8 easy test to see if the fsarchiver bug has caused a faulty image, is to try to run 'sfc /scannow' in admin prompt, that in my case at least refuse to work. Also opening the elevated command prompt through the Advanced boot options or whatever, didn't work at all.
Couple of the latest topics at fsarchiver forums are discussing about the bug:
http://www.fsarchiver.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1503

 

I know Comodo has Realtime Scan, Defense+, Hips and Sandbox.

My question is: Does Emsisoft have the same features?.
I need to know this.

 

It doesn't have sanbox, and it doesn't have HIPS unless you install also online armor.

Probably Emsisoft AV (AV only) is a little better

 

EAM has behavior blocker that Comodo will get in the next version....

 

I've heard that forecast somewhere before I am sure

 

I am a product translator and there are already Viruscope description string and options in files....

 

Interesting

 

Thanks for your comments.

Some people use EAM with Comodo Firewall.
Is this combo advisable and a good choice?.

 

Yes.
BTW, you can also try OA v7.....it has just been released....should be much lighter than v6.

 

Siketa, Do you say Online Armor is better than Comodo Firewall?

 

It is also a great product.
I meant...OA v7 is lighter than OA v6.

 

Urge them to include "Submit a bug" button. It's missing in all previous versions.

 

Curious to me too. Apparently they don't find it that much of an issue worth responding to or maybe they don't read these threads on their program.

I make no excuses for not showing any interest in Comodo stuff myself, especially when they have it within their means to easily help on issues like this soon after a new release.

A HIPS loyal here, if it ever rises to expectations i wouldn't hesitate a moment to integrate their work in my security roster. Until then it's enough to simply review and consider the results of users who live by Comodo stuff no matter what and weigh the options based on their experiences with it.

 

There is a comodo forum where he can has support, comodo staff can't scan whole internet to find threads with issues related with comodo. For being an HIPS loyal, seems that you forget that Comodo HIPS is the best out there and it's free.

In fact the problem you quoted is not related with Comodo as he already explained

 

I am read people have trouble with CIS 6.3 and win 8.1, eventhough it suppose to be full 8.1 ready. So anyone else have isses here? I want to use a great suite but now I am hesitan to use CIS on my win 8.1 wmc pro 64bit.

 

when upgrading to 8.1 it makes cis corrupt but doing a reinstall fixes the issue. cis works fine on 8.1

 

Thanks and does CIS on a 8.1 + wmc and 64bit works also fine?

 

should work just fine. im running win 8.1 pro without problems

 

Well I did install it and it ran fine but after reboot i received errors from windows and into a black screen. So after several reboot to fix the crash, windows loaded fine and now all is back to normal. so I investigated the error and it seems that CIS caused or blocked windows 8.1 sending my pc id and license to ms dns and I receid the error of authentication failure. Anyway it was weired and it scared me to hell, as I though I lost everything and had a crash.

Now all is well and normal with CIS. I wonder why cis blocked ms server authenticating my windows license?

here are the errors of windowscodec.dll 00007ffffBBc54c4 and nvxdsync.exe error at 0xf8badb0d at memory of 0xffffffff

 

I just checked event viewer and I still get the event ID 8208 security-spp that is releated to CIS. so I guess I have to uninstall CIS and see if the error is fixed.

 

Well after uninstall the errors were gone and all is normal except there is residual damage or problems remained since now I can not install any other 3rd party firewalls. I get one of the errors as before and event ID 8208 security-spp. SO I guess I am stuck with windows own firewall for now.

CIS screwed my windows 8.1 badly.

 

I thought that Comodo had a behavior blocker in HIPS? But maybe it's not correct?

"The Defense+ component of Comodo Internet Security is a host intrusion prevention system that constantly monitors the activities of all executable files on a PC. With Defense+ activated, the administrator is warned EVERY time an unknown application executable (.exe, .dll, .sys, .bat, etc) attempts to run."

http://help.comodo.com/topic-84-1-161-1529-defense -settings.html

 

Actually it's description of an anti-executable, not a BB.