Prevx vs. COMODO IS - Keylogging

I know that Comodo has a sandbox and I know how this works. Like AVs, sandboxes are not perfect and (this is important) it relies in user's choices to work. As you know, users are not perfect either. As I said, the risk is too big for people doing online banking, and eevry single layer you can add to your security is precious.

There are a lot of people using Prevx with Safe Online alongside different sandboxes, both solutions have their place. And Prevx will include some type of sandbox in version 4 too.

 

1) You didnt answer my question
2) You assume that Comodo can fail (a bug?), why not safeonline?,
Comodo offers 4 layers of protection AV, sandbox, D+, and if the malware is able to bypass this still need to bypass the firewall.
Since they release Comodo 4.1 nobody has been able to find a malware able to bypass only sandbox.
A behaviour blocker will be added in the next version of Comodo (1 layer more)
3) You are wrong, the sandbox do not relies in user's choices to work, D+ yes.
4) As far as I know safeonline will ask you when it detect that something is trying to modify the process of the broswer (like an HIPS) and you have to take the decision, so take the right choice.
4) If safeonline add a sandbox in the next version all the other features would be useless, you can use sandboxie and be more protected than with safeonline nowadays.
5) If you want an infallible and foolproof antikeylogger free try keyscrambler.

 

As a user/fan of Prevx I was disappointed to see Safeonline to fail in these two KeyLogging tests (it passes the Zemana test though)

http://www.youtube.com/user/9501frank#p/u/1/snWX0SGay90

Lets hope they'll fix that soon

Edit: Sorry,the SpyShelter test in the video is a screen grab one,i have tested myself and fails in the Keylogging too.

 

Try Keyscrambler I have never seen it fail in a test since the first version.

 

Does Keyscrambler personnal protects against screen capture? thanks

 

No just the keystrokes but It's so light...
You can see the different editions here: http://www.qfxsoftware.com/ks-windows/which-keyscrambler.htm

 

No, I answered your question, but you didn't like it because it implied that your beloved comodo could fail, and that's impossible, of course.

Why not?, it could fail. That's why I wrote about layers of protection. Accumulating weak arguments like you do, doesn't make a solid defense, you know.

So it's perfect, congratulations to Comodo users. It's game over for malware.

Why?. The sandbox in Comodo is impenetrabile.

You must authorize what makes it through the sandbox and into your computer, no?. I don't mind what Comodo calls this part of the process, the final decission is on the user's side.

To be honest, I don't know. In my case, Prevx S.O. have always made all the decisions on it's own until now. Prevx's guys always say that they try to avoid the HIPS model.

You are the one trying to prove that one app is good and the other is useless. I said that a security system that relies in user's choice is not perfect and thus, it makes sense to complement it with others. I'm not a Prevx fan boy, I say "Prevx with Safe Online is useful", not "Comodo is bad". Praising one app and trashing another is your hobby, not mine.

Sandboxes are very useful for warez kidz, for me they are not indispensable. If I wanted one, I would have it already. You say that all the other features in Prevx S.O. will be useless when they release a sandbox, so I must assume that you are wiser and know more about security than the guys that make Prevx. You are not alone, there are millions of kids all across the interwebz that know everything and do nothing.

Another infallible Security solution!!!!!!. The world ends in 2012. 2011 for malware makers.

Infallible and free!!!!!!!!!!!!......YAY!!!!!!!!!111111one11111one11!!!!!!!!!

You tested this......I assume.....

I'll try it. Thanks for the suggestion. Try Prevx with S.O. if you haven't already, it's a good app, seriously.

And if you excuse me, I'm out of this thread before it turns into something like that tennis match at Wimbledon today (59-59 in the fifth set, tomorrow more).

Cheers!.

 

Off topic remarks removed
I didnt say

Off topic remarks removed
And I said foolproof because seems that fits with your case, where answer a popup when your pc is being infected seems to be a problem.

The topic of the post is comodo+safeonline and not safeonline if you losed the track is not my problem.

I never said nothing about prevx, only safeonline.

Yes you are right your security model is better, I'm going to install 3 AV 4 FW and more crap just in case any software has a bug, and a hacker focus in my pc and is able to exploit it.
Then I am going to pay money for safe online that adds nothing to the security, just another antilogger that fails in the tests (Zemana, SS, CLT), another antiphising filter, and DNS obsolete security, and a protection for the broswer process, nice deal.

Nobody is telling you that safeonline is useless (but of course you have a problem when you read), the thing is that safeonline is quite useless if you already have Comodo installed and 1 plugin in Firefox.

Good luck.

 

SafeOnline adds a security layer that's specially designed to protect online banking credentials.

Of course, an internet security suite should prevent malware from running on a PC. But, as far as I know, no single vendor's suite provides 100% protection. SafeOnline therefore provides protection in case something nasty has slipped through that might steal your banking details. It's simple and effective.

 

"specially designed"? is a quite common protection, nothing new, o yes! the obsolete and useless DNS protection is new.

I'm not going to argue this again, the subject was if SafeOnline add any security over Comodo, and the answer is no, all the features are overlaping.

1AV + 1AV = 2AV = 1 Layer of security
1AV + 1FW= 2 Layers of security
And the first option is not better than the second one.

So this nasty thing in the case of Comodo, has to pass over the AV, the sandbox, D+, the phishing filter of the browser, the broswer... (noscript, cookie protection) and then the firewall. And as I said before nowadays we still need to find a malware able to bypass the sandbox, and another one able to bypass D+ protection a process from any injection. Both D+ and the sandbox provides keylogger protection.

For the same reason that nobody recommend use 2 AV's (even if they are compatible) or 2 FW, is useless run another software to cover the same layers is better and cheaper in this case to find another that can add a new layer of protection.

This is my point of view, I'm no telling you that safeonline is bad, or unistall it, I 'm saying that having Comodo+safeonline you will probably never see safeonline in action.

 

I like that summary.

 

This are some alternatives that will provide additional layers to software like Comodo or Kaspersky IS.

From this test: http://malwareresearchgroup.com/?page_id=2
I would bet that this apps will get a 100% at the end of the test.

"Sandbox" the broswer:
www.safecentral.com
www.trustware.com

Similar to safe online but free, and a software which the most important banks trust: www.trusteer.com

Login protection (I really like that, not only protects you also makes your live easier )
www.idvault.com
http://lastpass.com/ (I use this service)

 

"But free"............here you got Safe Online free, enjoy:

http://info.prevx.com/download.asp?grab=PREVXFACEBOOK

 

Prevx SO can be obtained free through Facebook, but I'm referring to the slowdown I experience cause it "analyzes" so many things, hence I made this topic. I've looked at Trusteer many many times and never understood how "install" it. xD

 

Oh yes, prevx only for facebook, so useful if you want to use it with more important things.

 

I didnt like trusteer, uses many resources, but the natural step if you are looking for addtitional protection is use a software able to isolate (sandbox) the broswer. You dont need to use it always just when you are doing important things.

The login protection is also fine.

 

IT'S THE FULL VERSION and it works everywhere. Come on, grab it, uncle Vojta recomends it.

 

As far as I understood is only for facebook: http://www.burchwords.com/archives/2115

Anyway if is totally free I can understand it because their capabilities are far from their competitors.
But as I told you before I dont like to overlap my security layers so I dont need it.

 

It's the full version and yes, it's far from it's competitors. Far, far, far away from them.

 

So why in your link is free and in the prevx website cost 15$/year?

http://www.prevx.com/buynow.asp?dur...r=&duration=year&safe=Y&units=1&DiscountCode=

 

That I don't know. This is not right from Prevx, indeed. The Facebook free version was supposed to exist only for a limited time, but it's been out for some months now. Those who buy it in their site must feel legitimately pissed about this.

 

You seem to be assuming that PC users only get infected via their browsers and that they keep everything sandboxed. I doubt that this is true for most people, so there are other ways for them to get infected. If a rootkit dropper is somehow executed without being detected, then they have a serious problem. However, SafeOnline provides an extra security layer that protects their online banking sessions against such malware even if their machine is infected by ZEUS or TDSS rootkits, etc. None of the security that you mention inside the browser or the sandbox does this.

Your 100% faith in CIS is touching. There are also several other excellent suites on the market. However, they all miss some malware. If you want to see where CIS has failed, you just need to look at their forum at http://forums.comodo.com/av-false-positivenegative-detection-reporting-b154.0/ . The picture is much the same for the other security vendors - indeed, the Prevx website controversially logs the malware missed by the major vendors (although Comodo seems to have too small a market share to get a special mention).

As far as I know, no company has produced the silver bullet that gives PC users 100% security - the best give >90%. However, a layered approach to security may improve substantially on that. So, to me, SafeOnline provides a useful extra layer that protects my bank details just in case something has slipped through my security suite.

If, like you, I believed that my security suite provided 100% protection,then SafeOnline would be unnecessary. But I don't believe that for one moment.

 

A FP is not a failure that can compromise your security and I'm going to remember you that prevx is famous for their high number of FP.
Yes, yes of course you haven't understood a word.
Could you tell me what is offering SafeOnline different to Comodo that is going to protect me? because this is what we are talking here.

 

@guest, prevx fans are like some form of a cult, very weird bunch.
My advice to you is to give up and let them use their shiny browser tab "protector".
Who cares...

 

hurrah! for Prevx for getting "green results" in the 1st day of MRG Browser security tests.

Prevx makes me feel somewhat safe without user interaction.
Comodo just makes me feel dumb with lots of popups my small brain couldnt decipher.