question about Comodo Antivirus

comodo antivirus its a joke
its new program its need time to be good program

so try another antivirus
kaspersky internet security
nod32
avira antivir premum

good luck

 

As I said earlier, I was a 2 time CAV user but was forced to uninstall it because it would consistently wipe out my Trillian Pro settings - I've submitted this as a bug.

Last night I was at a magazine store which sold a British publication called PC Utilities and they had a CAV review. While they rated it 4 out of 5 stars, they do caution the reader that CAV is still in beta and has not been submitted or certified by any reviewing body (i.e. http://www.av-comparatives.org/) and instead recommend you use one such as AVG or Avast.

I am looking forward to the day when they can fix this problem with Trillian and get certification. I've used their firewall software and did like it. For the time being I am using the 6 month free AntiVir and I may end up making this my permanent AV.

 

I noticed Comodo had released a new beta version, which I downloaded and tried this afternoon.

The detection rates are still as bad as ever. Also, the so-called "HIPS" was still flagging programs that I'd submitted to Comodo a few months ago when I tested an earlier version of CAVS. Apparently Comodo does absolutely nothing with submitted files but sit back and relax, because the much-touted so-called "HIPS" component is still nothing but a useless piece of junk that flags a whole bunch of legitimate programs and then wants me to upload all those ~60mb of data to Comodo. No way.

Lousy detection rates, an overrated "HIPS" and a protection ideology that obviously doesn't work. The Comodo CEO claimed months ago that they were working to extend their whitelist so as to reduce the "HIPS" FPs, apparently the result of their work is that people have to upload megabytes of data and whitelist a whole bunch of programs by themselves. I'd still stay the hell away from this one, at least for the time being.

 

I don't think you can expect much improvement from CAVS 2. The HIPS in that has been made obsolete by the one in the CPF 3 beta. All they are doing now is updating the database, cause all the effort is going into CAVS 3 which is getting closer. Better to wait for that before passing judgement.

 

I thought we were discussing the antivirus here.

The firewall is somewhat too bloated for my liking as well, and I don't want or need a HIPS either.

 

So that is why I said to wait for CAVS 3

 

My mistake, I thought you said wait for CPF v3.

Though my current beef with CAVS is the database updates... or rather, the lack thereof. With such invasive digging and requesting of files from users' systems, one would expect they've built up a comprehensive black/whitelist by now. For all the inconvenience CAVS users went through, I see no tangible results from Comodo.

 

I installed CAVS on my Daughters computer a few months ago and also disabled the HIPS. She isn't computer literate, and the pop ups were a pain. So far it has been working fine, updating definitions and humming away. I am using BOClean on my computer, along with Comodo FW, NOD32, and SAS Pro. No problems.

 

Hi solcroft,

I happened to note the number of viruses in the list on 3rd September. Since then there has been an increase of 1600 to 261174 and I see at least one update every day.

I don't know how this would compare with others, but a quick look at Kaspersky shows 398862, so it is a long way short of that.

 

signature count means absolutely nothing

 

Hi,

The problem with signatures is that it isn't as simple as counting the numbers. Many vendors have generic detection signatures that can catch multiple variants with only one string - it shows quality, as opposed to quantity. Take Avira for example, who has over 1000k+ signatures and yet only scores marginally better than KAV's 390k in AVC tests, because the unpacking support of Avira is absolutely horrible and they need to add signatures for most repacked variants. Or take Symantec with only ~73k signatures, yet beat even KAV in the latest test. It displays a powerful scanning engine and excellent signatures on the vendor's part, and you don't judge how much a scanner can detect based on how man signatures it has.

Just so you know, Comodo scored around 40% the last time AVC tested it. That's a damn long way to go, since the top dogs consistently score more than 90% in a test of more than 800k pieces of malware.

 

Thanks solcroft, I am here to learn. I knew about those test results and would certainly not suggest using it to someone else. There have been many updates since February, but of course it is hard to know what effect they have had. I am staying on board waiting for CAVS 3, but would not rely on it alone.

C.S.J I was just replying to the mention of a lack of updates, whether the count means anything is not relevant to that, but thankyou for your input.