Defence + or Eqsecure

How does comodo's defence + comapre with EqSecure? When setup up correctly, would either of the two provide excellent protection or is one better than the other in terms of overall system coverage and resource usage etc?

 

EqSecure using alcyon's ruleset.

 

Defence+ allows you to *train* it yourself. Additionally, it has an extensive Help file, which is very very clear. It has a superb support forum, populated by knowlegeable users, as well as a reasonably accessible support staff.

EQS has essentially no help file, & no support forum. If you elect to use Alcyon's settings (or settings provided by ANYone else) then you are blindly using a program that is too complicated for the average user.

"Out-of-the-box" EQS is basically a set of blank configuration formats. The highly technical expertise needed to correctly configure EQS is the reason why lots of users admire Alcyon's rules so much.

Defence+ comes with a frequently-updated whitelist of trusted apps. EQS does not.

The long-term economic viability of EQS is an unknown. On the other hand, D+ has a very high probability of long-term support & maintenance by the Comodo organization.

As to which you should choose? If you want teacher to do your homework, then use EQS with somebody else's rule set. If you are an advanced computer-security person & tweak-addict, then EQS should be a delight. Otherwise...

 

Bill,

What you say is true. Still there are exceptions in my opinion, to name a brilliant small company Online Armor and a one man band show DefenseWall, which have proven to last amongst competition from simular sized companies (OA vs AntiExecutable, DW vs GeSWall, EQS vs SSM/PS)

I use D+ in stead of EQS now (until new vesion is final), but hey EQS was (is?) the most brilliant full featured free HIPS on XP.

When we all choose rational, those sympatic initiatives won't have a chance.

There is also a reason for having one non-main stream product in your security set up. People working in big companies, become true soldiers (meaning working according policies, corperate vales, rules). For innnovation companies need Mavericks (people doing it differently).

I for instance had a formal IT training, my son of 16 is programming for fun. According to my standards he produces a lot of crab, but he also made a small program which took me a full day, before I understood the logic behind it. It was put smartly together using a flaw in the supporting programming framework. Same applies with Hackers, they think differently than the corporate guys. So maybe one needs at least one creative small company/one man band program to fill up the corporate white spots.

Regards Kees

 

Otherwise- use sandbox, it's obvious.

 

I'm still realizing amazingly positive returns/results with EQS 4.0 Beta.

For me it's the HIPS of choice for the best manual configuration possibilities to monitor MANY registry AND FILES extensions as well as thanks to Alcyon's Rulesets even FOLDER monitorings.

Some time delay is been experienced with releasing the final but if thats any indication of even better and more safe improvements one can't be too impatient i suppose.

As is it's so far done a very effective task at interrupting file signalling to the system and offers enough data to make an informed decision for those who don't mind getting their hands dirty. LoL

 

Quote from EQSecure Forums recently.

What can this mean for avid long time users of it?

 

EQS is lighter- its main advantage over Defence Plus.

Defence Plus- active development, forum support, nice GUI, Firewall included, easier to use etc

I choosed D plus due to all these facts.

 

I use D+ because it also comes with firewall, a bit more easier to use, and because it feels more solid because I think it has a better self protection than
eqsecure and you can also configure D+ to protect all other running apps from process termination. dont think eqsecure has the process termination protection cauldn't find it anywhere??

 

EQS has it just like CFP Defence Plus.

 

The classical configurable HIPS in the EQS approach is just more appealing i think, to those who like to tinker under the hood themselves and still enjoy tighter then usual security.

Comodo D+ is also really nice and adding of the HIPS to it's firewall definitely propelled more attention/popularity to it, plus it also has some configurations to work with on it's own.

Personally i use and approve both but EQS is still my personal favorite ATM.