Comodo CIS 4 Free added to Matousec 148 test.

Thanks Hernan.

While not entirely discounting the value of Matousec's leak testing, I have of late some reservations as to its worth, discussed in this thread:  The value of leak-testing of personal firewalls

I once used and recommended Comodo Firewall/CIS (which always served me well) but reluctantly abandoned it over concerns about its ethics, as outlined here:  Comodo Strikes Out

Comodo updates have been banned elsewhere, for similar concerns:  Products with Ask Toolbar

A respected Comodo forum moderator has just resigned, citing many concerns: 11 point about Comodo (reasons to leave)

I do know that CIS (and particularly its AV component) has not been submitted to testing by independent websites I trust.

I personally have no beef with Comodo, but do think folks should be aware of some of the controversies concerning it.

I agree for all the given reasons Joe, and then there is the matter of the difficulty of use and getting to know the product. I have Outpost  Free on my XP computer and Online Armor Free on this one, and combined with my other security products, they seem to get the job done. :emotion-1:

Hernan,

Like Joe, I have had second thoughts about (a reconsideration of) the need for "super-loaded" third-party firewalls.

We both believe... and I recently wrote that... for most users, the included Windows Firewall should be sufficient... particularly when used in addition to a NAT/hardware firewall that's included in most routers nowadays; see, toward the bottom, here:  http://en.community.dell.com/support-forums/virus-spyware/f/3522/t/19331387.aspx

Windows firewall in fact has one advantage over third party firewalls, in that it loads immediately with the operating system... whereas third party firewalls typically load "a few seconds" later, along with all your startup programs/services.  (of course, when used in addition to a router's NAT firewall, this is not a concern, as the router's firewall offers immediate protection.)

for what it's worth, I'm still using Comodo 2.4 firewall on one of my PC's... and have no plans to "upgrade" it.   I got involved with it 3 years ago, when it was then the top rated candidate in Scott Finnie's review/testing (which gave great credence to Matousec's results).   This was before Comodo added DEFENSE+HIPS in version 3.x, which immensely complicated its use (for average users).  I have taken the time to "train" my comodo 2.4, it's doing its job well, and I have no desire to start again from scratch training a new third-party firewall (Comodo or otherwise).

The way I look at things, even if one were to concede that 2.4 no longer passes muster with Matousec's leak-testing methodology, it certainly offers me protection at least as good as [in fact, i believe better than] Windows firewall.   (as stated above, i have my router/NAT firewall, so I am not concerned about the few seconds it takes comodo to load.)  And since I believe Windows firewall is sufficient, a fortiori, I believe I have more-than-adequate protection using Comodo 2.4... despite it being 3-years "ancient".

Lest anyone question my belief in Windows firewall, let me emphasize that I use Comodo on only one of my PC's... there are two other home PC's and one work PC where in fact I use Windows (XP) firewall.

Keep in mind that a firewall is only one part of ("layer" in) one's computer security... so should anything detrimental poke through it, some other component of my defenses hopefully would catch it.   (of course, there's no guarantee...)

finally, you wrote "I can not belive that Avast 5 is a poor security program".  

It's NOT a poor "program".   Playing "devil's advocate" here, if we were to assume that Avast's firewall isn't the best, we could then perhaps claim that avast isn't the best security suite.   Regardless, it indeed remains a very good anti-virus program, which is the reason I use it on all my home PC's.   

Joe, David, and Dale.

I thank you for the feedback. I am not a Comodo fan boy and I was also aware of all the points all of you mentioned about Comodo CIS. I used to have Zone Alarm, but I had some issues with it. So I was looking for other firewalls, and reading reviews, I ended up with Comodo which I thought was going to be a mess with its steep learning curve and all. However I found out that I rather have Comodo HIPS than TeaTimer from SpyBot and the firewall was not that hard to learn.

I know that Windows firewall and the hardware firewall of a router is more than enough to guard a PC. However I do not use a router, my set up is a very humble DSL modem (given by my ISP) to a network-switch (very cheap) to 4 PC using CAT 5e that do not communicate with each other.

I also know about the Ask toolbar, but other safe and renowned programs also offer tool bars in their installments and some of them not even give you the chance to deny the installment, and yes I followed all the arguments about Comodo and the SSL certification give away that by the way they were not SSL, but it seemed to me more like a "telenovela", you see I am Latin, and I can pick up all the drama of the envy and jealousy of two may be old friends about you did or said or you didn´t do or didn´t say. Well in other words I was satisfied with Comodo arguments about what they were doing.  

The motives for Xp to quit working for Comodo are his own, and without getting in the way of his personal reasons or bad working conditions, yes I can tell you that sometimes Comodo releases a "full" version program that behaves like a Betta, CIS 4 is a good example, and Comodo may have problems in the PR department or the support department, but you only have to read how many complaints are posted here in the Forums about DeLL to give you and idea that because they exist that does not mean they are real. Sorry they are real but it does not mean that the company is totally in disarray because if not Dell would be a "  ?  " company selling "  ?  " computers and I think they are not.

I believe that there are excellent firewalls out there. OnLine Armor, Outpost Firewall, and PC Tools firewall would be in my list to replace Comodo if that time comes, but for now CIS 3.14 has given me no trouble and it is performing beyond my expectations in my sys.

Regards.   

Valid points all, Hernan.

I posted mainly as info for the general readership here, as the topic hasn't been discussed lately.

Although I now use OutPost Pro (and only because I won it in another forum, otherwise I'd use the free version) I can say without any hesitation that the last version of CIS I used (with its AV disabled) performed very well for me. In many ways I miss it, and my reasons for changing were personal.

I congratulate Comodo for its latest 100% rating at matousec (which does in fact evaluate more than just leaks). I remain uncertain as to the significance of these tests.

But to put it into perspective, no 3rd party firewall I've used (Comodo, OP, and OA) has ever alerted me to anything other than legit programs trying to access the internet. I very much consider "outbound protection" an optional third-line layer of defense, and only for more advanced users.

As always, I say "stick with what works for you".

Normally I pay scant attention to commercial magazine website reviews, but post this PCMag  link only because it agrees with my experience.

Comodo Internet Security 4.0: The Verdict

"I really hope that one day I'll discover a free security suite that I can recommend, but Comodo Internet Security 4.0 is not that suite. Its firewall is good, but the multi-layered malware protection is way too in-your-face for my taste, and it does a terrible job of cleaning up existing malware infestations. Your best bet is to install just the firewall component (choose "Firewall Only" when prompted) and use a better antivirus."

Joe,

interesting article.   You quoted from the ending... I'll add one quote from the beginning:

"[Comodo Internet Security 4.0's] firewall, real-time antivirus, sandbox and Defense+ components all put a noticeable drag on system performance".

In fairness/disclosure, I haven't used the product.   And with such a pejorative review, I would have no interest in ever trying.

Hi Joe and David.

In fairness of the article, I would have to agree. There are a few users complaining in Comodo´s forums about CIS 4 being a CPU hugger.

https://forums.comodo.com/news-announcements-feedback-cis/me-and-cis-have-split-t54448.0.html

and yes CIS, any version of CIS, is not good cleaning infections, but I already said it above in my first post that I would not compare the AV in CIS with Avast eventhough Avast was rated as poor in the Matousec tests.

"I can not believe that Avast 5 is a poor security program, got a 3% score, may be its HISP or firewall are not as good as CIS 4, but I believe that its AV is better than CIS"

I also agree with david.  I would not even try CIS 4 after reading that PC Mag article but then again I did mentioned in my first post why I am still using CIS 3.14.

"....CIS 4 came out with a new feature called Sandbox ( It is not the same as Sandboxie), which is not working as desire. So, most of CIS 4 users are deactivating this feature..."

"I use CIS 3.14 because why should I install a new security prog to set it up to behave like the one I already have installed?"

I believe Comodo has the best intentions to offer a full security suite for free and I think they got it with its firewall and D+ (if you like a talkative HIPS), but in its eagerness to please every body it has made mistakes like releasing new program versions that are still too green and not ready to be called full released versions. I think I also said that in my second post.

"..yes I can tell you that sometimes Comodo releases a "full" version program that behaves like a Betta, CIS 4 is a good example.."

Please do not think I am defending Comodo. I believe that these Virus & Malware Discussions Forum in Dell is the most fairest of the forums I have been, and Joe53´s, ky331´s, Bugbatter´s and Red Dawn´s point of views are highly regarded by yours truly, but since English is not my native language I sometimes doubt if my points came across as I intended them to be. Thank you.

What Comodo Forums members and moderators have to say about the PC Mag article, even Melih, top chairman and I believe Comodo´s owner, has some things to say about it.

 https://forums.comodo.com/news-announcements-feedback-cis/pcmag-review-of-cis-40-t55883.0.html

Regards. 

Hernan,

I hope you realize that when (Joe and) I post and comment on articles, we typically do so for the sake of general discussion, so that people reading our comments (and hopefully, the original article links as well)  may be intrigued to pursue the matter on their own.   Put in other words, we often post are comments aiming toward the general audience, rather than exclusively targeting things for the original poster.

We are not trying to get you... or anyone else who's happy with it... away from Comodo.   As noted, I myself use comodo on one of my PC's... and am content to remain with the three-year-old version 2.4  and like you, I rely on Avast for my anti-virus protection.

I too value the opinions/advice of Joe, BB, and RD... and let me also state, I like what I see in your contributions here.   Keep up the good work.

Your English is much better than my Spanish, Hernan, and your posts/links are much appreciated!

One of the things I like about this forum is the lack of "fanboys" and flamewars over favourite/disliked security programs. How cool it is to have opinions from so many countries, with such civil discourse. I only wish more would participate.

As a former user of  Comodo Firewalls and CIS, I follow its ongoing evolution with interest.

Vaya con Dios

One of the things I like about this forum is the lack of "fanboys" and flamewars over favourite/disliked security programs. How cool it is to have opinions from so many countries, with such civil discourse. I only wish more would participate. Vaya con Dios

That is exactly why appreciate David´s comments and yours and that is why I was concerned about my comments would come across as a Comodo "fanboy". As Joe said in his post my goal is to make any member reading what I posted curious enough to investigate on his own.

Thank you Joe and God Speed to you too.

Hernan, ..... people reading our comments (and hopefully, the original article links as well)  may be intrigued to pursue the matter on their own.   Put in other words, we often post are comments aiming toward the general audience, rather than exclusively targeting things for the original poster. We are not trying to get you... or anyone else who's happy with it... away from Comodo.......

I hope that when I do post, my articles come across the same way. I do not think that you or Joe are trying to "get me", no way. That is why I like this Forum. Like Joe said on the other post "..With such civil discourse..".

Thank you for your encouragement. I will do.