another example why "if it aint broke, don't fix it".
comodo had (has?) a great FIREWALL. but they couldn't leave well-enough alone... they insisted on expanding/"bloating" it into a security suite... that's causing problems/conflicts and "turning off" users...
I was/am very content with version 2.4.x, which I still use to this day (in addition to my router's NAT firewall). yes, i understand it may no longer be considered "perfect", in terms of the latest leak-tests, but I'm sure it can't be any worse than using the Windows XP firewall. [And like I said, things have to first get past the router before any software firewall has to deal with it]
You are correct, but since I do not have a router, I got to have a good firewall. Even though Comodo comes as a security suite, you can choose to install just the firewall or the firewall with proactive defence (HIPS). I chose proactive D+ and I was amazed how little it takes from my system. Really light. Also it has a "Clean PC Mode" that learns what you have in the PC to cut down on alerts while you "teach" it then you can swicth it to "safe, cutom, or paranoid mode" and a "installation mode" to make much more easily any new app install.
Sorry if it sounds as if I am promoting it, but besides the bug in 3.8, while I was using 3.5, it ran smoothly in my PC.
sorry. i was not trying to offer any advice about your situation, but rather, simply lamenting a general trend we've seen among (free) software security products:
avg, which used to offer a nice anti-virus product, messed up royally when it "upgraded" from version 7.5 to version 8, which also included anti-spyware and anti-rootkit protection. consequently, the stand-alone avg anti-spyware (formerly Ewido) and avg anti-rootkit, were discontinued.
comodo's BOClean, a resident anti-malware program, is being discontinued as a stand-alone product, in favor of it being integrated into Comodo's Internet Security Suite.
personally, i appreciated these compact, separate products, which allowed me to test them individually... and then, "pick-and-choose" the best combination which worked well for me. it appears that those days are rapidly disappearing.
on the matter of firewalls, for anyone interested in researching the matter (going beyond the basic/included Windows firewall), the main comparative, in terms of leak-testing, can be found here:
by all means, if you're happy with comodo 3.5 (or 3.8, when fixed), feel free to stick with it... just like i (for better or worse) am sticking with 2.4 [despite what now appears as an abysmal ranking by Matousec].
Hey ky331, no apology needed. Any good advice is always welcome, and besides you are correct. I remember when I was running Windows 95 and AVG was like 7 Megs and SpyBot was like 4 Megs.
Just a few additional thoughts on CIS and incompatibilities:
I have been using CIS 3.8 (firewall/D+ only) with no incompatibilies noted with any of my other defenses, and no reversion to 3.5. Then again, I don't use Spysweeper or Ad-Aware. I have been very happy with CIS firewall so far, and certainly don't consider it bloated, at least in terms of memory usage. The size of the installer, of course, has grown from about 8MB to 34MB over the years I've used it, but this doesn't really affect performance.
I should mention for the benefit of other readers that my practice when running on-demand scans from any of my AV/AS programs is to disable all other resident programs first (except for the firewall/D+), and of course to close all running apps for the duration including any browser open. This not only quickens the scan, but prevents "duelling defenses". For example, if I run SAS free, I disable BOC, Windows Defender and NOD32 AV resident protection.
As long as updates to CIS continue to allow me to install only the FW, I will likely keep it. In this sense CIS differs from other suites where you have to install the whole nine yards. I will miss BOC though.
My other reservation about CIS is that it attempts (and recommends) one install its SafeSurf Toolbar which is based on the Ask toolbar, and which is checked by default during installation. This is adware at best, does not enhance security, and is detected by many other scanners. It was piggy-backed only to earn money for Comodo. This is a tactic that is increasingly common (used also by Zonelabs FW products, Webroot Spysweeper, Symantec/Norton, Stopzilla) and really erodes one's faith in a product/vendor. One wonders if its inclusion by unsuspecting users has not accounted for some of the incompatibilities noted.
I have happily been using Online Armor on both machines for several months now with no problems. Very few alerts, and those seem to be during updates to other security products. Hopefully, they won't decide to go down this primrose path of trying to be all things to all people...and trying to urge me to install some handy dandy tool bar.
Just reporting back. It seems that people in Comodo are stuck fast since they updated CIS from v. 3.5.57173.439 to v. 3.8.64739.471, Feb 19 and then to v. 3.8.65951.477, Feb. 26. There are about 6 different posts with around 150 replies and more than 2500 viewers. Complaining about the same thing, Can not run Comodo firewall protection with D+ (HIPS) in their systems. CFP D+ interferes with other security programs. Most affected are systems running Ad Aware, Spy Sweeper, SuperAntimalware, NOD32, Avast, AVG, Live One Care. Also depends on the OS if it is XP or Vista 32 bit or 64 bit.
Note: There are people reporting everything running smoothly others not so lucky, or deactivating D+ works, but what is a firewall without HIPS?
Symptoms:
Slow OS or lack of response, including third programs like browsers, video and sound apps.
Endless Scans.
Lost of network connectivity.
And even BSOD.
When this behaviour was reported immediately after the first release of v.3.8 back in Feb. 20, Comodo´s liaisons and developers reported that they have found a bug and was going to be fixed for the new released (Feb. 26.), but now they are quiet.
The sad thing is that the veterans of the forum and liaisons are hinting that it is better to get rid of whatever AV or antimalware one has and stick with CIS because is better. I hope I am wrong.
Keep in mind that Comodo did not introduce HIPS into its firewall until version 3.x --- earlier versions were "HIP-less".
Let's also keep in mind that the original firewall concept was basically to "hide" your computer's existence from the outside world, so as to prevent intrusion into your system. That's basically what the windows XP firewall attempts to do, no more, no less.
Along came "third-party firewalls", which in addition to hiding one's computer and blocking unsolicited INcoming traffic, usually also monitor OUTgoing traffic. They advise you when some program is trying to "reach out" to the internet, and typically allow you to decide ("teach it") whether you want to allow that particular program to do so, or to deny it.
Anti-virus and anti-malware products are limited in what they can detect: In particular, programs/scanners that are "signature-based" are prone to miss new malware products which are not yet included in their signature databases. They can also fail to detect malware programs (e.g., rootkits) that are cleverly disguised to avoid detection. That's where HIPS comes into play: HIPS (Host -based Intrusion Prevention System) identifies intruders by their behavior, rather than by any characteristic fingerprint. HIPS protection attempts to intercept/stop any suspiciousbehavior, and then asks the user whether he or she wants to allow it.
By this definition, WinPatrol and TeaTimer would be examples of rudimentary HIPS programs. Among other things, they alert you to any program that adds itself to your auto-startup sequence. (Some programs, like your firewall, resident anti-virus and anti-malware, should auto-boot whenever your system starts. But just about any other program that does so should be considered for potentially suspicious behavior.) Nowadays, trying to draw a fine-line between what is HIPS and what is anti-malware is very difficult to do... but here's a link to what one site refers to as separate/independent HIPS programs [Note: I am listing this site as an example of the independent HIPS concept. However, I do NOT use the programs mentioned there, and as such, i am **NOT** "endorsing" them]: http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-hips.htm
So yes, it's possible to find/run a good firewall (which functions ONLY as a firewall), a separate HIPS program, a separate anti-virus program, and a separate anti-malware program (one resident, but at least 2 on-demand scanners).
As mentioned before, things were much nicer/simpler before when companies developed separate, dedicated programs, rather than tossing all their eggs into one basket (and winding up with scrambled eggs :emotion-5: )
Hopefully, Comodo will address the many problems it has now inflicted upon its users. But unless they do so swiftly, and completely, I would not be surprised to learn of many "defections" to their competitors.
I used to have SpyBot with Tea Timer, but it was too much for my father and sister (regular user of this PC) who kept calling me to know what to do. I switched to Win Patrol (paid), at least it gives an explanation of the file that detects.
I have used in my PCs AVG (until I found out about Avast +/- 6 years ago), Avast home Ed., Spy Bot, Spyware Blaster, Win Patrol and Zone Alarm. Also I have go through an assortment of antimalware; Gold "something", Spyware Doctor, Ad Aware, Spy Sweeper, and SuperAntispyware, and lately I have used MalwareBytes´.
With the acquisition of this PC I let McAfee Security Center ran his license ( I´ve never try a security center before); However, I added Spy Sweeper and Win Patrol, and it was OK. I just got one minor Trojan a while back for fooling around with my niece´s MP3. It took me one afternoon to get rid of it.
Since McAfee ran out, I went back to Avast, and I wanted to try a new firewall because there have been so much controversy about Zone Alarm. I have been using CFP D+ 3.5 for at least a month and I was getting used to it when this new update happened. So I would do like you, I will stay with 3.5 until Comodo fix this or if not I might try Online Armor.
With all due respect, Hernan, 6 posts about incompatibility problems between CIS 3.8 and other apps is hardly unusual following introduction of a new version, particularly given the large customer base of Comodo. I follow the Comodo forums, and do not sense a widespread problem.
However I use only the Firewall/D+, and don't have their AV module installed. It wouldn't surprise me if CAV is partly responsible for some of the problems reported.
All I can say is that the latest version of 3.8x has caused no incompatability with any of my other (numerous) defenses. Since you provided no links to posts at Comodo, I can't address the many issues you raise, other than to advise folks considering installing CIS to avoid installing their AV. Also to note that CIS is a demanding FW with a steep learning curve; as such I would not recommend it for novices.
"I am only posting here about CFP to inform DELL forum members who think their PCs could be infected to be aware that Comodo firewall and some antimalware could be the cause of erratic behaviour in their systems".
That's the admirable thing to do, and i'm sure your efforts are/will be appreciated.
Likewise, many of my posts in this forum are to alert members to be on the lookout for potential problems. As can also be said for many of Joe's posts.
Open discussion is for the best... and together, we all make a better team.
No problem. I do not use their AV either and most of the links are in the firewall section. As I said, some systems do not show any incompatibility. If I insinuated that is wide spread and sounded outrageous, pardon my English, but if I read that many posts and I see more than 2,000 readers interested in them, I have to consider how many more people there are out there who do not post or not even are awared of looking for help in forums. I am only posting here about CFP to infor DELL forums members who think their PCs could be infected to be awared that Comodo firewall and some antimalware could be the cause of erratic behaviour in their systems. Hey I like CFP, is light, is not that hard to understand and in a couple of day all the alerts and pop ups quiet down. I wish Comodo dev´s come out with a solution "pronto" so I can update. In no way I am bashing or bad mouthing the product. Any way, here are some links.
Some "rambling" thoughts on incompatibility issues (directed at the general community, not at any of the participants in this particular thread):
We buy computers manufactured by DELL. With a processor by Intel (some use AMD). With an operating system from Microsoft (most likely). And a printer by HP (or Lexmark). Then there's the video card/driver, sound card/driver, speakers, and who knows what other peripherals we opt to add-on. In short, it's a miracle that most of these can actually cooperate/coexist peacefully.
And if possible hardware conflicts aren't enough, the potential for software conflict is all the more greater. Anti-virus, Anti-spyware, firewall. Anti-phishing filters, and web-page raters. The entire realm of toolbars, and innumerable other browser "add-ons". "Passive" blockers (like SpywareBlaster), and HOSTS files. OpenDNS (for those who use it). There's so much loaded on most machines --- between what has come pre-loaded by the manufacturer, what the [main] user has loaded (sometimes years ago, and has long-since forgotten), and by what his/her friends, family, relatives, colleagues, and "guests" have downloaded (often without permission).
And how about the (admittedly rare) occasions when a Windows "critical/security" update had unforeseen/unintended consequences resulting in incompatibility with third-party software programs [or worse yet, unending boot-up loops]?
I am an advocate of using separate, dedicated programs, rather than an all-in-one suite. of course, this increases the likelihood that one of these programs may ultimately conflict with something else. And the more separate programs one uses, the more difficult it may become to determine just which two (three?) are the culprits. [That's the one advantage of a suite: presumably, all of its components are compatible.]
We also have to learn to change with the times. Years ago, just about everyone knew to run Ad-Aware and SpyBot --- they were the standard "one-two punch" for knocking out adware/spyware. But times have changed, malware has grown exponentially more sophisticated, and the tools of the past are, in my opinion/experience, no longer effective against the current genre of attacks. Nevertheless, I still come across threads that speak of using Ad-Aware and SpyBot, including users who insist on clinging to them, like a "comfortable blanket".
[Side note: I still believe in SpyBot's IMMUNIZATION feature; and its TeaTimer (for users who can handle making its required decisions). But that's for another thread.]
Having tried to help many people here over the years, it has become clear that there are all levels of sophistication participating, from the naivest of "newbies" to the most educated of technicians. So when a person comes to these forums with a problem, we have no a priori way of knowing their background. I try to speak to the average user, and in so doing, have at times been accused of "talking down" or "babying" people who can handle themselves, while at other times, discovered that no matter how simple I try to make things, it can still be totally unintelligible to an absolute newbie.
In general, most people might not realize all the potential sources for software conflict on their particular system. As an example, for people who have downloaded CIS -- Comodo Internet Security SUITE --- have they included the anti-virus components... or have they (like Joe) opted out of the anti-virus components? Anyone who includes the anti-virus components of Comodo has to be sure they have no other resident anti-virus program already installed/running, lest there be a conflict here. Likewise, the comodo firewall can be installed in its "full glory" with Defense+HIPS, or in a "neutered" version without these components.
While we are all eager to make recommendations here, we have to realize that there's no such thing as "one size fits all". for example, in terms of free resident anti-malware protection, I use a combination of Windows Defender together with SpyBot's TeaTimer. Joe uses (or at least, used to use) a combination of Windows Defender together with BOClean. And BugBatter uses (or used to use) SpywareGuard. Each of us needs to determine what works best on our particular systems. And "working best" has many elements beyond just the ability to secure one's system: among other factors, it also includes ease-of-use. for example, comodo's 3.x firewall with D+HIPS contains loads of "bells and whistles", and gives the user ultimate control over so very much. but as a result, it also has one of the steepest "learning curves" among firewalls. Meaning it is NOT the best choice for users who want a simple (but nonetheless effective) firewall.
And then, unfortunately, there are some instances when some things seem to malfunction for no apparent rhyme-nor-reason. I think it's fair to say I have a good sense of what I'm doing when it comes to computers. But over the years, I was never able to get a software firewall to successfully work with my older WinME system. I tried ZoneAlarm and at least one other (Sygate??), and the resulting system was so unstable/unreliable that I had no choice but to remove it/them [and work without a firewall, despite the potential risks inherent in such a decision... I considered it preferable to risk infection, than to tolerate frequent lock-ups and fatal crashes]. Was the problem in the firewall? Or perhaps a flaw of Windows ME? Or perhaps a flaw of Windows ME as it was installed on my particular system??
I used to use McAfee's SiteAdvisor. But at some point, I realized IE was crashing, with SiteAdvisor being cited as the culprit. I checked to be sure I had the latest version. (I might even have tried reverting to an older version...) But the continuing crashes of IE forced me to remove site advisor... after which IE would run just fine. Fortunately, there are other (and better) "web raters" available. I am using TrendProtect + WOT (perhaps overkill, but they seem to co-exist nicely) in IE, and WOT in firefox. Another possibility here is SiteHound. An for those using SiteAdvisor, if it still works for you, that's great.
The bottom line being, there's more than one way to skin a cat. So to each his/her own. Be it Coke or Pepsi. Or even A&W root beer :emotion-5:
You welcome joe53. I am just hoping that for the next CFP update my machine behaves better in order to continue using Comodo firewall D +.
Ky331, what can I tell you ? Thank you for your support.
"Some "rambling" thoughts on incompatibility issues"
Some rambling, and above all well said.
That is why I have been reading the forums for the past 2 years, to learn. I am the average computer user who did not know a pea about hardware, software, or security programs 6 or 5 years ago. Yes I knew How to use productivity apps and how to surf the web and above all that my PC needed a good AV, but whenever I found myself in trouble, or my comp would behave badly, I had to call a tech and spent an outrageous amount of money to fix it, and more often than not, for something so simple. I started to read manuals and magazines. Tried to investigate in the web why this? or that? and so on. Yes, I still have to go a long way and more these days that everything is changing continuously and at a speed that is amazing. So many different softwares and hardware that is impossible to keep track of all of them and how they work with each other. Like ky331 said " In short, it's a miracle that most of these can actually cooperate/coexist peacefully." In short, I am here to learn from you guys and to help if I can.
Sometimes I help people in the forum, simple things. Things that I have tried or done. I left complicated things to the experts. Also because the language barrier, my system and most of my apps are in Spanish, to give instructions is not so easy, to translate names on applications and to tell someone to click here or there it may not be the same, but if I can help, you bet I will do it.
Thank you both again for reading my rambling ( hey ky331, this is rambling ); however, since I am relatively new here you might have wanted to know something about me.
ky331
3 Apprentice
•
15.6K Posts
0
February 24th, 2009 07:00
another example why "if it aint broke, don't fix it".
comodo had (has?) a great FIREWALL. but they couldn't leave well-enough alone... they insisted on expanding/"bloating" it into a security suite... that's causing problems/conflicts and "turning off" users...
I was/am very content with version 2.4.x, which I still use to this day (in addition to my router's NAT firewall). yes, i understand it may no longer be considered "perfect", in terms of the latest leak-tests, but I'm sure it can't be any worse than using the Windows XP firewall. [And like I said, things have to first get past the router before any software firewall has to deal with it]
iroc9555
2 Intern
•
1K Posts
0
February 24th, 2009 07:00
Hi ky331.
You are correct, but since I do not have a router, I got to have a good firewall. Even though Comodo comes as a security suite, you can choose to install just the firewall or the firewall with proactive defence (HIPS). I chose proactive D+ and I was amazed how little it takes from my system. Really light. Also it has a "Clean PC Mode" that learns what you have in the PC to cut down on alerts while you "teach" it then you can swicth it to "safe, cutom, or paranoid mode" and a "installation mode" to make much more easily any new app install.
Sorry if it sounds as if I am promoting it, but besides the bug in 3.8, while I was using 3.5, it ran smoothly in my PC.
Hope it helps.
ky331
3 Apprentice
•
15.6K Posts
0
February 24th, 2009 08:00
sorry. i was not trying to offer any advice about your situation, but rather, simply lamenting a general trend we've seen among (free) software security products:
avg, which used to offer a nice anti-virus product, messed up royally when it "upgraded" from version 7.5 to version 8, which also included anti-spyware and anti-rootkit protection. consequently, the stand-alone avg anti-spyware (formerly Ewido) and avg anti-rootkit, were discontinued.
comodo's BOClean, a resident anti-malware program, is being discontinued as a stand-alone product, in favor of it being integrated into Comodo's Internet Security Suite.
personally, i appreciated these compact, separate products, which allowed me to test them individually... and then, "pick-and-choose" the best combination which worked well for me. it appears that those days are rapidly disappearing.
on the matter of firewalls, for anyone interested in researching the matter (going beyond the basic/included Windows firewall), the main comparative, in terms of leak-testing, can be found here:
http://www.matousec.com/projects/firewall-challenge/results.php
CIS rates quite highly there.
by all means, if you're happy with comodo 3.5 (or 3.8, when fixed), feel free to stick with it... just like i (for better or worse) am sticking with 2.4 [despite what now appears as an abysmal ranking by Matousec].
iroc9555
2 Intern
•
1K Posts
0
February 24th, 2009 08:00
Hey ky331, no apology needed. Any good advice is always welcome, and besides you are correct. I remember when I was running Windows 95 and AVG was like 7 Megs and SpyBot was like 4 Megs.
Yes, I was awared of that test, thank you anyway.
joe53
2 Intern
•
5.8K Posts
0
February 24th, 2009 16:00
Just a few additional thoughts on CIS and incompatibilities:
I have been using CIS 3.8 (firewall/D+ only) with no incompatibilies noted with any of my other defenses, and no reversion to 3.5. Then again, I don't use Spysweeper or Ad-Aware. I have been very happy with CIS firewall so far, and certainly don't consider it bloated, at least in terms of memory usage. The size of the installer, of course, has grown from about 8MB to 34MB over the years I've used it, but this doesn't really affect performance.
I agree with just about all comments made in this thread, and will be sad if CIS firewall integrates BOC, but my understanding is that it actually will be integrated with the Comodo AV (CAV) module which currently can be disabled.
http://forums.comodo.com/comodo_boclean_antimalware/boclean_to_be_discontinued-t34653.0.html;msg250889#msg250889
I should mention for the benefit of other readers that my practice when running on-demand scans from any of my AV/AS programs is to disable all other resident programs first (except for the firewall/D+), and of course to close all running apps for the duration including any browser open. This not only quickens the scan, but prevents "duelling defenses". For example, if I run SAS free, I disable BOC, Windows Defender and NOD32 AV resident protection.
As long as updates to CIS continue to allow me to install only the FW, I will likely keep it. In this sense CIS differs from other suites where you have to install the whole nine yards. I will miss BOC though.
My other reservation about CIS is that it attempts (and recommends) one install its SafeSurf Toolbar which is based on the Ask toolbar, and which is checked by default during installation. This is adware at best, does not enhance security, and is detected by many other scanners. It was piggy-backed only to earn money for Comodo. This is a tactic that is increasingly common (used also by Zonelabs FW products, Webroot Spysweeper, Symantec/Norton, Stopzilla) and really erodes one's faith in a product/vendor. One wonders if its inclusion by unsuspecting users has not accounted for some of the incompatibilities noted.
dalem29
2 Intern
•
2.2K Posts
0
February 25th, 2009 06:00
I have happily been using Online Armor on both machines for several months now with no problems. Very few alerts, and those seem to be during updates to other security products. Hopefully, they won't decide to go down this primrose path of trying to be all things to all people...and trying to urge me to install some handy dandy tool bar.
iroc9555
2 Intern
•
1K Posts
0
March 1st, 2009 08:00
Hi guys.
Just reporting back. It seems that people in Comodo are stuck fast since they updated CIS from v. 3.5.57173.439 to v. 3.8.64739.471, Feb 19 and then to v. 3.8.65951.477, Feb. 26. There are about 6 different posts with around 150 replies and more than 2500 viewers. Complaining about the same thing, Can not run Comodo firewall protection with D+ (HIPS) in their systems. CFP D+ interferes with other security programs. Most affected are systems running Ad Aware, Spy Sweeper, SuperAntimalware, NOD32, Avast, AVG, Live One Care. Also depends on the OS if it is XP or Vista 32 bit or 64 bit.
Note: There are people reporting everything running smoothly others not so lucky, or deactivating D+ works, but what is a firewall without HIPS?
Symptoms:
Slow OS or lack of response, including third programs like browsers, video and sound apps.
Endless Scans.
Lost of network connectivity.
And even BSOD.
When this behaviour was reported immediately after the first release of v.3.8 back in Feb. 20, Comodo´s liaisons and developers reported that they have found a bug and was going to be fixed for the new released (Feb. 26.), but now they are quiet.
The sad thing is that the veterans of the forum and liaisons are hinting that it is better to get rid of whatever AV or antimalware one has and stick with CIS because is better. I hope I am wrong.
ky331
3 Apprentice
•
15.6K Posts
0
March 1st, 2009 10:00
"what is a firewall without HIPS?"
Keep in mind that Comodo did not introduce HIPS into its firewall until version 3.x --- earlier versions were "HIP-less".
Let's also keep in mind that the original firewall concept was basically to "hide" your computer's existence from the outside world, so as to prevent intrusion into your system. That's basically what the windows XP firewall attempts to do, no more, no less.
Along came "third-party firewalls", which in addition to hiding one's computer and blocking unsolicited INcoming traffic, usually also monitor OUTgoing traffic. They advise you when some program is trying to "reach out" to the internet, and typically allow you to decide ("teach it") whether you want to allow that particular program to do so, or to deny it.
Anti-virus and anti-malware products are limited in what they can detect: In particular, programs/scanners that are "signature-based" are prone to miss new malware products which are not yet included in their signature databases. They can also fail to detect malware programs (e.g., rootkits) that are cleverly disguised to avoid detection. That's where HIPS comes into play: HIPS (Host -based Intrusion Prevention System) identifies intruders by their behavior, rather than by any characteristic fingerprint. HIPS protection attempts to intercept/stop any suspicious behavior, and then asks the user whether he or she wants to allow it.
By this definition, WinPatrol and TeaTimer would be examples of rudimentary HIPS programs. Among other things, they alert you to any program that adds itself to your auto-startup sequence. (Some programs, like your firewall, resident anti-virus and anti-malware, should auto-boot whenever your system starts. But just about any other program that does so should be considered for potentially suspicious behavior.) Nowadays, trying to draw a fine-line between what is HIPS and what is anti-malware is very difficult to do... but here's a link to what one site refers to as separate/independent HIPS programs [Note: I am listing this site as an example of the independent HIPS concept. However, I do NOT use the programs mentioned there, and as such, i am **NOT** "endorsing" them]: http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-hips.htm
So yes, it's possible to find/run a good firewall (which functions ONLY as a firewall), a separate HIPS program, a separate anti-virus program, and a separate anti-malware program (one resident, but at least 2 on-demand scanners).
As mentioned before, things were much nicer/simpler before when companies developed separate, dedicated programs, rather than tossing all their eggs into one basket (and winding up with scrambled eggs :emotion-5: )
Hopefully, Comodo will address the many problems it has now inflicted upon its users. But unless they do so swiftly, and completely, I would not be surprised to learn of many "defections" to their competitors.
iroc9555
2 Intern
•
1K Posts
0
March 1st, 2009 11:00
Hi ky331.
Thank you for the feedback.
I used to have SpyBot with Tea Timer, but it was too much for my father and sister (regular user of this PC) who kept calling me to know what to do. I switched to Win Patrol (paid), at least it gives an explanation of the file that detects.
I have used in my PCs AVG (until I found out about Avast +/- 6 years ago), Avast home Ed., Spy Bot, Spyware Blaster, Win Patrol and Zone Alarm. Also I have go through an assortment of antimalware; Gold "something", Spyware Doctor, Ad Aware, Spy Sweeper, and SuperAntispyware, and lately I have used MalwareBytes´.
With the acquisition of this PC I let McAfee Security Center ran his license ( I´ve never try a security center before); However, I added Spy Sweeper and Win Patrol, and it was OK. I just got one minor Trojan a while back for fooling around with my niece´s MP3. It took me one afternoon to get rid of it.
Since McAfee ran out, I went back to Avast, and I wanted to try a new firewall because there have been so much controversy about Zone Alarm. I have been using CFP D+ 3.5 for at least a month and I was getting used to it when this new update happened. So I would do like you, I will stay with 3.5 until Comodo fix this or if not I might try Online Armor.
joe53
2 Intern
•
5.8K Posts
0
March 1st, 2009 14:00
With all due respect, Hernan, 6 posts about incompatibility problems between CIS 3.8 and other apps is hardly unusual following introduction of a new version, particularly given the large customer base of Comodo. I follow the Comodo forums, and do not sense a widespread problem.
However I use only the Firewall/D+, and don't have their AV module installed. It wouldn't surprise me if CAV is partly responsible for some of the problems reported.
All I can say is that the latest version of 3.8x has caused no incompatability with any of my other (numerous) defenses. Since you provided no links to posts at Comodo, I can't address the many issues you raise, other than to advise folks considering installing CIS to avoid installing their AV. Also to note that CIS is a demanding FW with a steep learning curve; as such I would not recommend it for novices.
ky331
3 Apprentice
•
15.6K Posts
0
March 1st, 2009 17:00
"I am only posting here about CFP to inform DELL forum members who think their PCs could be infected to be aware that Comodo firewall and some antimalware could be the cause of erratic behaviour in their systems".
That's the admirable thing to do, and i'm sure your efforts are/will be appreciated.
Likewise, many of my posts in this forum are to alert members to be on the lookout for potential problems. As can also be said for many of Joe's posts.
Open discussion is for the best... and together, we all make a better team.
iroc9555
2 Intern
•
1K Posts
0
March 1st, 2009 17:00
Hi joe53.
No problem. I do not use their AV either and most of the links are in the firewall section. As I said, some systems do not show any incompatibility. If I insinuated that is wide spread and sounded outrageous, pardon my English, but if I read that many posts and I see more than 2,000 readers interested in them, I have to consider how many more people there are out there who do not post or not even are awared of looking for help in forums. I am only posting here about CFP to infor DELL forums members who think their PCs could be infected to be awared that Comodo firewall and some antimalware could be the cause of erratic behaviour in their systems. Hey I like CFP, is light, is not that hard to understand and in a couple of day all the alerts and pop ups quiet down. I wish Comodo dev´s come out with a solution "pronto" so I can update. In no way I am bashing or bad mouthing the product. Any way, here are some links.
https://forums.comodo.com/firewall_help/comodo_firewall_and_spysweeper_problems-t34906.0.html
https://forums.comodo.com/firewall_help/something_amiss_with_3864739471-t34922.0.html
https://forums.comodo.com/firewall_help/updated_comodo_firewall_on_x64-t34829.0.html
https://forums.comodo.com/defense_help/the_defense_is_not_functioning_properly_warning_first_time_using_cis-t30418.0.html
https://forums.comodo.com/defense_help/avast_cis_conflict-t34957.0.html
https://forums.comodo.com/defense_help/upgraded_to_cis_38_defense_now_prevents_half_my_system_from_running-t34822.0.html
https://forums.comodo.com/feedbackcommentsannouncementsnews_cis/comodo_internet_security_3865951477_released-t35638.0.html
Hope it helps.
joe53
2 Intern
•
5.8K Posts
0
March 1st, 2009 18:00
Thanks Hernan, for those links. I have reviewed them all. I think we are all on the same track here, in our motives to recommend the best defenses.
I can't comment on any incompatibility with Spy Sweeper, as I don't use it.
I can't comment on problems with Vista x64 for the same reason.
I can't coment on conflicts with avast! for the same reason.
I can't comment on conflicts with Ad-Aware, other than to note this is a program I no longer recommend, for various reasons.
------------------------------------
If and when CIS causes me any problems, you can be sure you will hear about it here.
ky331
3 Apprentice
•
15.6K Posts
0
March 2nd, 2009 06:00
Some "rambling" thoughts on incompatibility issues (directed at the general community, not at any of the participants in this particular thread):
We buy computers manufactured by DELL. With a processor by Intel (some use AMD). With an operating system from Microsoft (most likely). And a printer by HP (or Lexmark). Then there's the video card/driver, sound card/driver, speakers, and who knows what other peripherals we opt to add-on. In short, it's a miracle that most of these can actually cooperate/coexist peacefully.
And if possible hardware conflicts aren't enough, the potential for software conflict is all the more greater. Anti-virus, Anti-spyware, firewall. Anti-phishing filters, and web-page raters. The entire realm of toolbars, and innumerable other browser "add-ons". "Passive" blockers (like SpywareBlaster), and HOSTS files. OpenDNS (for those who use it). There's so much loaded on most machines --- between what has come pre-loaded by the manufacturer, what the [main] user has loaded (sometimes years ago, and has long-since forgotten), and by what his/her friends, family, relatives, colleagues, and "guests" have downloaded (often without permission).
And how about the (admittedly rare) occasions when a Windows "critical/security" update had unforeseen/unintended consequences resulting in incompatibility with third-party software programs [or worse yet, unending boot-up loops]?
I am an advocate of using separate, dedicated programs, rather than an all-in-one suite. of course, this increases the likelihood that one of these programs may ultimately conflict with something else. And the more separate programs one uses, the more difficult it may become to determine just which two (three?) are the culprits. [That's the one advantage of a suite: presumably, all of its components are compatible.]
We also have to learn to change with the times. Years ago, just about everyone knew to run Ad-Aware and SpyBot --- they were the standard "one-two punch" for knocking out adware/spyware. But times have changed, malware has grown exponentially more sophisticated, and the tools of the past are, in my opinion/experience, no longer effective against the current genre of attacks. Nevertheless, I still come across threads that speak of using Ad-Aware and SpyBot, including users who insist on clinging to them, like a "comfortable blanket".
[Side note: I still believe in SpyBot's IMMUNIZATION feature; and its TeaTimer (for users who can handle making its required decisions). But that's for another thread.]
Having tried to help many people here over the years, it has become clear that there are all levels of sophistication participating, from the naivest of "newbies" to the most educated of technicians. So when a person comes to these forums with a problem, we have no a priori way of knowing their background. I try to speak to the average user, and in so doing, have at times been accused of "talking down" or "babying" people who can handle themselves, while at other times, discovered that no matter how simple I try to make things, it can still be totally unintelligible to an absolute newbie.
In general, most people might not realize all the potential sources for software conflict on their particular system. As an example, for people who have downloaded CIS -- Comodo Internet Security SUITE --- have they included the anti-virus components... or have they (like Joe) opted out of the anti-virus components? Anyone who includes the anti-virus components of Comodo has to be sure they have no other resident anti-virus program already installed/running, lest there be a conflict here. Likewise, the comodo firewall can be installed in its "full glory" with Defense+HIPS, or in a "neutered" version without these components.
While we are all eager to make recommendations here, we have to realize that there's no such thing as "one size fits all". for example, in terms of free resident anti-malware protection, I use a combination of Windows Defender together with SpyBot's TeaTimer. Joe uses (or at least, used to use) a combination of Windows Defender together with BOClean. And BugBatter uses (or used to use) SpywareGuard. Each of us needs to determine what works best on our particular systems. And "working best" has many elements beyond just the ability to secure one's system: among other factors, it also includes ease-of-use. for example, comodo's 3.x firewall with D+HIPS contains loads of "bells and whistles", and gives the user ultimate control over so very much. but as a result, it also has one of the steepest "learning curves" among firewalls. Meaning it is NOT the best choice for users who want a simple (but nonetheless effective) firewall.
And then, unfortunately, there are some instances when some things seem to malfunction for no apparent rhyme-nor-reason. I think it's fair to say I have a good sense of what I'm doing when it comes to computers. But over the years, I was never able to get a software firewall to successfully work with my older WinME system. I tried ZoneAlarm and at least one other (Sygate??), and the resulting system was so unstable/unreliable that I had no choice but to remove it/them [and work without a firewall, despite the potential risks inherent in such a decision... I considered it preferable to risk infection, than to tolerate frequent lock-ups and fatal crashes]. Was the problem in the firewall? Or perhaps a flaw of Windows ME? Or perhaps a flaw of Windows ME as it was installed on my particular system??
I used to use McAfee's SiteAdvisor. But at some point, I realized IE was crashing, with SiteAdvisor being cited as the culprit. I checked to be sure I had the latest version. (I might even have tried reverting to an older version...) But the continuing crashes of IE forced me to remove site advisor... after which IE would run just fine. Fortunately, there are other (and better) "web raters" available. I am using TrendProtect + WOT (perhaps overkill, but they seem to co-exist nicely) in IE, and WOT in firefox. Another possibility here is SiteHound. An for those using SiteAdvisor, if it still works for you, that's great.
The bottom line being, there's more than one way to skin a cat. So to each his/her own. Be it Coke or Pepsi. Or even A&W root beer :emotion-5:
iroc9555
2 Intern
•
1K Posts
0
March 2nd, 2009 13:00
You welcome joe53. I am just hoping that for the next CFP update my machine behaves better in order to continue using Comodo firewall D +.
Ky331, what can I tell you ? Thank you for your support.
"Some "rambling" thoughts on incompatibility issues"
Some rambling, and above all well said.
That is why I have been reading the forums for the past 2 years, to learn. I am the average computer user who did not know a pea about hardware, software, or security programs 6 or 5 years ago. Yes I knew How to use productivity apps and how to surf the web and above all that my PC needed a good AV, but whenever I found myself in trouble, or my comp would behave badly, I had to call a tech and spent an outrageous amount of money to fix it, and more often than not, for something so simple. I started to read manuals and magazines. Tried to investigate in the web why this? or that? and so on. Yes, I still have to go a long way and more these days that everything is changing continuously and at a speed that is amazing. So many different softwares and hardware that is impossible to keep track of all of them and how they work with each other. Like ky331 said " In short, it's a miracle that most of these can actually cooperate/coexist peacefully." In short, I am here to learn from you guys and to help if I can.
Sometimes I help people in the forum, simple things. Things that I have tried or done. I left complicated things to the experts. Also because the language barrier, my system and most of my apps are in Spanish, to give instructions is not so easy, to translate names on applications and to tell someone to click here or there it may not be the same, but if I can help, you bet I will do it.
Thank you both again for reading my rambling ( hey ky331, this is rambling ); however, since I am relatively new here you might have wanted to know something about me.