I am thinking in change Panda solutions for Comodo Solutions. Do you recommend?

[Guest]

[marcos.zy]

Hello,

So, following the suggestion of ganda, I have created a global rule on CPF 3, Blocking protocol "IP", direction "In", source "any", destination "any" and IP protocol "any". This rule is working fine for me, and now all tests shows my ports as "stealth". 

This rule does not block anything on my machine, and I can use softwares like Imesh, etc, without problems.

LeoniAquila, do you think that have I to install the Comodo Memory Guardian? This will not consume higher resources on my machine, remembering that I have Comodo BOClean, Avira AntiVir Personal and CPF 3 ?

Japo, I think that Panda really consumes higher levels of resources, because after it unninstalation and instalation of Comodo and Avira, my machine is much more faster.

Thank you all for your help. 

[LeoniAquila]

Hi,

LeoniAquila, do you think that have I to install the Comodo Memory Guardian? This will not consume higher resources on my machine, remembering that I have Comodo BOClean, Avira AntiVir Personal and CPF 3 ?

To be honest CMG is the kind of protection I know the least about. It protects from so called buffer overflow attacks, which I think very few programs do. You can read more about it at the CMG board section. I haven't tried it in a while so I don't know its resource usage, but why not give it a try, it's a tiny program. In later releases of Comodo Firewall Pro (3.x), CMG will actually be integrated! So in a while I think we won't need anything more than CFP 3(.x) and CAVS 3 (w. BOClean integrated).

/LA

[marcos.zy]

Glad to hear this. 

Thank you, I will take a look at CMG. 

Regards.

[Ganda]

Glad to hear this. 

Thank you, I will take a look at CMG. 

Regards.

but you need to be careful  , there's known compatibility issue between CMG & BOClean. (luckily, i have them both with no problem)

[LeoniAquila]

but you need to be careful  , there's known compatibility issue between CMG & BOClean. (luckily, i have them both with no problem)

Ah, good that you pointed out this, I thought about it before I wrote my post for Marcos, but then I completely forgot it!

/LA

[aladinonl]

Hi aladinonl,

Really. PIS 2007 is lite, but I consider the Panda Solutions very poor, now. In the last days the solution started to "find" viruses in any file on my machine. Many of it files I have sent to "virustotal.com", where it was scanned by inumerous anti-virus engines, and nothing was found.

And I don't know how is the Panda technical support in Europe or USA, but here in Brazil it is very weak, and the technicians knows usually less than the users.  Panda is definitively "dead" for me. 

lol, dis is funny.

i actually had no prob w PIS operation.
and after i discontinued PIS, panda frequently emailed me remindin dat i wasnt protected n such i need blah blah blah as well as some new update, offer...
i consider dis a lil disturbin'

but Panda was obtrusiv in da sense dat it traced my personal info. In da emails, it called me mr <the flat owner> [ at ]_[ at ], luckily not me coz im not da flat owner.
dat was totally unneccessary.

[marcos.zy]

Hello! 

but you need to be careful  Shocked , there's known compatibility issue between CMG & BOClean. (luckily, i have them both with no problem)

Ok, I will take care and see how CMG runs in my machine. 

lol, dis is funny.

i actually had no prob w PIS operation.
and after i discontinued PIS, panda frequently emailed me remindin dat i wasnt protected n such i need blah blah blah as well as some new update, offer...
i consider dis a lil disturbin'

but Panda was obtrusiv in da sense dat it traced my personal info. In da emails, it called me mr <the flat owner>  [ at ] _ [ at ] , luckily not me coz im not da flat owner.
dat was totally unneccessary.

Really, these e-mails are very disturbing.  I don't understand why they send it to the users even if the users don't have accepted to receive it. But, PIS is now out of my machines, and I am loving the fact of use so useful and powerful security solutions paying nothing for it. 

Comodo is really a great software house, and many thanks for them.  And let's await for CAVS 3. 

[Ganda]

lol, dis is funny.

i actually had no prob w PIS operation.
and after i discontinued PIS, panda frequently emailed me remindin dat i wasnt protected n such i need blah blah blah as well as some new update, offer...
i consider dis a lil disturbin'

but Panda was obtrusiv in da sense dat it traced my personal info. In da emails, it called me mr <the flat owner>  [ at ] _ [ at ] , luckily not me coz im not da flat owner.
dat was totally unneccessary.

i still got these annoying email from Mc.Afee. what can i do, it's preinstalled on my laptop.

Ah, good that you pointed out this, I thought about it before I wrote my post for Marcos, but then I completely forgot it!

/LA

now i think you forgot your name too /LA 
announcement to all newbie :
/L A = Leoni Aquila
and he (or she   ) said she (or he  ) is a man.
  who'd trust her  

[marcos.zy]

Hello again! 

I would like to ask you regarding two rules I have created at my CPF, as described below:

2nd place rule -  Block - Protocol IP - Direction In - Source address any - Destination address any - IP protocol any

1st place rule - Allow - Protocol IP - Direction In/Out - Source address single IP (a machine from my LAN) - Destination address any - IP details any

The 2nd place rule I have created to prevent any port to be opened, and by this way, all tests I made now, like for example at PcFlank, shows all my ports as "stealth".

The first place rule I have created to allow connections between my machine and the other I have in my LAN, and also to allow internet sharing.

Do you think that the two above rules can cause some problem of some type? Or, if the above rules can block software like "Imesh", for example (I have added Imesh as a "trusted application")?

Many thanks to you all. 

[Ganda]

these are mine for LAN :
both rules are created from firewall/common/stealth port wizard:
allow all outgoing request if the target is IP in[LAN]
allow all incoming request if the sender is IP in [LAN]

and this was taught by Gibran :
block IP in from IP not in [LAN] to IP in [LAN]/any/any
block IP out from IP in [LAN] to IP not in [LAN] any/any

i use IP range for [LAN]==> 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.255

[LeoniAquila]

i still got these annoying email from Mc.Afee. what can i do, it's preinstalled on my laptop.
now i think you forgot your name too /LA 
announcement to all newbie :
/L A = Leoni Aquila
and he (or she   ) said she (or he  ) is a man.
  who'd trust her  

LOL, I thought LA was an established name after 1200+ posts.

♂

[Japo]

i still got these annoying email from Mc.Afee. what can i do, it's preinstalled on my laptop.

Even if it was preinstalled you should be able to uninstall it just the same as if it was installed by yourself. But they don't need their product's being installed to send you spam.

Are you sure that the emails don't have any unsubscribe link? Even the smallest honest business or newsletter will include that. Otherwise you can filter them out with your email client.

[marcos.zy]

Hello,

If I simply add an application as "trusted", it will allow any incoming and outgoing traffic for it (I have made it for Imesh, for example)?

[Japo]

If I simply add an application as "trusted", it will allow any incoming and outgoing traffic for it (I have made it for Imesh, for example)?

Yes, but: policies are separate for the firewall and for Defense+. A program can be "trusted" or whatever policy you define in Defense+, and still you can make it blocked in the firewall. In network (firewall's) policy, trusted means allowing everything in and out (without logging), yes.

[marcos.zy]

So, in this case, have I to create the rules both in firewall and in defense+?

Can the creation of the rule only on firewall, or only on defense+ cause some problem?

Thank you again. 

[Tags:]