Comodo Leak Tested Suite Updated!

Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by 3xist, Nov 15, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Juha L

    Juha L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2007
    Posts:
    48
    Aha, and what does Comodo score when first run in "very low" alert mode? Sounds like this remembering of the leak test results after first running it in paranoid mode is kinda artificial and not close to the real life situation?
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2008
  2. alex_s

    alex_s Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Posts:
    1,251
    Firewall should be only firewall, behavior blocker should be only behavior blocker. But what then should stop the leaks ? Special leaks blocker ? :)
     
  3. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    HIPS... thats what stops the leaks as well as many other things that it protects, when u use a firewall like comodo or online armor, its not the firewall component blocking most of the leaks, its the HIPS part of it.
     
  4. 3xist

    3xist Guest

    Hi Guys.

    Thanks for testing your products. You can also add your product name and results here So we can add results & products to the list. If a product or result is wrong - Please let us know. Remember this is test the full power of your application.
     
  5. tsec

    tsec Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    Posts:
    181
    Results posted 3xist.

    Now I am off to slash my wrists... ;)
     
  6. 3xist

    3xist Guest

    Thanks mate!
     
  7. alex_s

    alex_s Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Posts:
    1,251
    Yep, HIPS stops most, but HIPS itself knows nothing about outbound protection, and leak-tests aim to break outbound. This is why neither only firewall, nor only HIPS can be effective against leaks, but only combined product.
     
  8. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    unless the HIPS has outbound protection as well... how else would ProSecurity (which is a HIPS) be able to get such a high rank at matousec?
     
  9. bonedriven

    bonedriven Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2007
    Posts:
    566
    I'm using Avira personal+OA3
    When I downloaded the program,Avira said coat.dll contains malicious code.I think the test has not begun yet,so I click ignore.

    After I ran the test,it seems it stuck at 270/340.I couldn't close the program.I clicked "test" again.Then It seems it went on and finished at 330/340.Still,It stuck there.I couldn't close the program.I need to end the process in tast manager.

    o_O
     
  10. 3xist

    3xist Guest

    Try disabling Avira AV all together during the test.

    I know ProSecurity has been discontinued, The owner/Developer joined Comodo - he was trying to sell the code before....
     
  11. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    hmm that sounds very promising for the developement of Comodo's D+ with his help.
     
  12. bonedriven

    bonedriven Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2007
    Posts:
    566
    Thank you for your reply.
    The difference after I disable Avira AV is that I then can manually exit the test.But it still stuck at 270/340.If I click exit,it's ok.If I click test again,the result will show 330/340

    So,I don't know which one is the result(the "?" button doesn't work either)

    The test just doesn't go well with my system
     
  13. alex_s

    alex_s Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Posts:
    1,251
    Because ProSecurity is very good HIPS. Though, for now it has 93% against 62 tests. I'd like to see its result against all the 73 tests. And I think there is some upper limit for pure HIPS (even close to ideal) in matou rate.
     
  14. alex_s

    alex_s Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Posts:
    1,251
    What does it mean ? Do not ask me, please, how did I get these results, because they were got by self-made means and I'm completely sure everything was blocked correctly. It just seems "error" state doesn't count as "protected" which is wrong, I think.

    Score 280/340

    1. Hijacking: ActiveDesktop Protected
    2. Hijacking: AppinitDlls Protected
    3. Hijacking: ChangeDebuggerPath Protected
    4. Hijacking: StartupPrograms Protected
    5. Hijacking: SupersedeServiceDll Protected
    6. Hijacking: UIHost Protected
    7. Hijacking: Userinit Protected
    8. Hijacking: WinlogonNotify Protected
    9. Impersonation: BITS Protected
    10. Impersonation: Coat Protected
    11. Impersonation: DDE Protected
    12. Impersonation: ExplorerAsParent Protected
    13. Impersonation: OLE automation Protected
    14. InfoSend: DNS Test Protected
    15. InfoSend: ICMP Test Protected
    16. Injection: AdvancedProcessTermination Protected
    17. Injection: APC dll injection Error
    18. Injection: CreateRemoteThread Error
    19. Injection: DupHandles Protected
    20. Injection: KnownDlls Protected
    21. Injection: ProcessInject Protected
    22. Injection: Services Protected
    23. Injection: SetThreadContext Protected
    24. Injection: SetWindowsHookEx Protected
    25. Injection: SetWinEventHook Protected
    26. Invasion: DebugControl Protected
    27. Invasion: FileDrop Protected
    28. Invasion: PhysicalMemory Protected
    29. Invasion: RawDisk Protected
    30. Invasion: Runner Protected
    31. RootkitInstallation: ChangeDrvPath Error
    32. RootkitInstallation: DriverSupersede Error
    33. RootkitInstallation: LoadAndCallImage Error
    34. RootkitInstallation: MissingDriverLoad Error
     
  15. SamSpade

    SamSpade Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Posts:
    415
    Just ran the CLT on Online Armor AV+ v. 3.x.208: 340/340

    Had a pop-up for each test (sometimes more than one pop-up), so I was busy. But OA is doing the job it was created to do.

    Second build in a row that has scored a perfect result, this time my browser (Firefox 3.04) was open. Not bad.

    SamSpade


    |||
     
  16. Carver

    Carver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,910
    Location:
    USA
    I ran CLT on Online Armor AV and Opera v9.62 and Online Armor AV DELETED OPERA also all Opera icons were missing, I double clicked on the .exe and nothing happened, I had to re install to repair Opera.
     
  17. SamSpade

    SamSpade Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Posts:
    415

    I had a similar problem when I ran CLT under OA AV+ v. 3.x.203: OA changed my "program access" to "blocked" for Firefox under the "Firewall" tab. Once I fixed that, and also re-installed Ffox over the top, all worked as it should; but I did run the test the second time with Ffox closed.

    I have tried Opera now (under OA AV+ v. 3.x.208 ) and Opera works fine.

    Did you have Opera open when you ran CLT?? That could be the problem.

    Sam

    |||
     
  18. Carver

    Carver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,910
    Location:
    USA
    Yes, I re ran CLT, I closed Opera. This time it just blocked Opera.
     
  19. SamSpade

    SamSpade Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Posts:
    415

    Very good!! If you unblock Opera in the rules, does OA still stop Opera from opening??


    ///
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2008
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.