CFP 3.0.8.214 Beta General Feedback [Closed]

[Guest]

[foxman]

Hi Azz000888,

To begin with, we should all know a beta version means it is released for testing  , it is expected to have BUGS, a lot of it in fact  .  It may or may not crash you system, it may be even not friendly to install (or uninstall) as all    .  So, it helps to read up what other has come across (bugs, pitfall, problems, incompatibilities etc. etc.) and what some has done to work around or avoid some known problems in this forum, and eventually to decide if this beta version is for us to try. 

I strongly recommend you read up the following thread:

http://forums.comodo.com/cfp_beta_corner/discussions_on_how_cfp_3_beta_works_not_for_bug_reports-t11459.0.html
http://forums.comodo.com/cfp_beta_corner/cfp_v308214_beta_workarounds_only-t12091.0.html
http://forums.comodo.com/cfp_beta_corner/cfpv308214_beta_buglist-t12483.0.html
http://forums.comodo.com/cfp_beta_corner/cfp_v308214_beta_bug_reports_32bit_version-t11967.0.html

I believe most of the answer to your questions are there. Good Luck and have fun trying out CFP3!

 

[azz000888]

thanks but actually, i can't find any likely situation in the posts you provided...


But i will hope for the lastest 3.0 offical version!

[Dennis2]

CFPv3.0.8.214 Beta Buglist
Re:-32bit - Log: "More..." button doesn't work under "View Firewall Events"
I must be one of the few not having problems with this more button works in both firewall and defence view events on both computers XP Laptop and Vista desktop.

Acer Aspire 1700
Windows XP Home Version 2000 Service Pack 2
Pentium 4 3.06ghz
AVG 7.5 Anti Virus Professional

Acer Aspire E700
Vista Home P. Version 6 Build 6000
Intel Core Duo 6300 [ at ] 1.86ghz
AVG 7.5 Anti Virus Professional

[rcbblgy]

CFPv3.0.8.214 Beta Buglist
Re:-32bit - Log: "More..." button doesn't work under "View Firewall Events"
I must be one of the few not having problems with this more button works in both firewall and defence view events on both computers XP Laptop and Vista desktop.

Acer Aspire 1700
Windows XP Home Version 2000 Service Pack 2
Pentium 4 3.06ghz
AVG 7.5 Anti Virus Professional

Acer Aspire E700
Vista Home P. Version 6 Build 6000
Intel Core Duo 6300 [ at ] 1.86ghz
AVG 7.5 Anti Virus Professional

Sometime it works , sometimes it doesn't . If the events is enough much , it will work , if the events aren't enough much , it willn't work .

[rcbblgy]

I hope the alerts of CFP can give me more details . When a process wants to create or delete a file/folder/register key , the alerts should tell users the process wants to create or delete , not only modify . Many times I think "modify" means "change" .

[Little Mac]

When a process wants to create or delete a file/folder/register key , the alerts should tell users the process wants to create or delete , not only modify . Many times I think "modify" means "change" .

Good point.  I think the alerts are pointing to the item that is being Modified (an addition or deletion is indeed a modification), but a change in wording to be more precise would be good.

LM

[Mirage]

Hey Melih,

Here's some points I wish to share, after reading more than 8 to 9 pages of this topic I realise that there's really a big issues on the level of usage on Comodo...

Different users different taste and perspective on it.

As a person who been using so many different firewall, I find it really very common that no matter how many times I tried to give each product their strenght and weakness, I feel that the user most concern is what should they do went a program try to connect to the internet. Will this firewall be difficult to use, eg.. alot of settings to configure, alot of thing to check.

At times, I get calls from people using ZoneAlarm, and cannot access the internet because of the autolock system will lockdown the internet and block for a period of time. Sometimes I get weirdiest calls of people asking me why is there windows personal firewall.

So I think my point here is maybe you might consider modes of 2 beginneers , advanced mode.

if the person do not know what to do, when he select beginneers mode, the user will now rely on comodo whitelist to autoset whatever application is that may popup to ask the users. If the application is not in the whitelist database, it will like the user to send the filename, version, of the application. ( if you want submit file to a location for the developer to test but I think application name, filename and version is sufficient to look for the application in the internet). Once it is send, comodo will ask the user to temporary deny or accept the application to access the internet.

Advanced Mode is definitely entirely all on the user perferences to what he wants to set and configure.

( HIPS if there' going to be one will be the most touchy problem for noobs who never know a things).

I been introducing comodo firewall to all my friends, but there were more quit than acceptance to it.Well they cannot appreciate the state of art of Comodo Firewall v2.4 can give them. Hopefully 3.0 might turn their heads back and amazed by its power. LIke I do

[Melih]

Thanks for that Mirage

Yep.. we are in full agreement about the modes.
We will have as a default a version that will be very quite and won't disturb the user. and if you change that setting to more advanced one, then you can get to tweak around and see all the alerts (or some of them, depending on the settings.).

thank you

Melih

[Arkangyal]

Just writing notes, so pardon me

I read throgugh some posts and most users find the firewall either too difficult or found too much settings. Can you please create two interfaces at least so the basic would be the novice/beginner interface, which is quite easy to handle, and another for advance/experienced users. While for the beginner cfp wouldn't show much settings the user would still be able to solve easy jobs like allowing application to go out or to establish network connections ~ maybe this is something without Defense+ shown? I don't know how much work it would be to create these but the users would be quite happy (i guess).

My own opninion is that real advance level begins when you set up permissions for keyboard, etc. access. Maybe it's also a good idea to create an intermediate level for average users (would understand port handling somehow and read the help to find a solution).

Simple things which would make the user's life much better:
Rename "Computer Security Policy" to something which the user won't mix up with gpedit.msc. I would either leave out the computer word or rename it to "Application Security Policy", which should be much more logical. At this point the user will lose the line: now how it will work when i start up my new firefox? First the firewall's network rule will ask something? or is it a trusted application already, so what? will defense+ asks anything? which will be the first, second... last layer or popup window?
"Image execution" is another nice name, what is misleading for the average users: jpg or gif is an image, are those executables? The name is not good (my opinion).

edit: part of this suggestion is obsolate, i haven't read all the forum messages. Sorry for that.

[abr]

 

Sorry if i have to say this, but you new interface is such a mess!! I made ONE wrong klick, & i just cannot find where this &§%$ setting ended up. What is this? I cannot access the sound settings anymore, nor other important settings, Firewall causing a block saying "rundll32.dll is not a valid Win32 Application". This is what´s gonna happen to a lot of people, so they won´t be able to find the spot where to correct this, come on.

WHY?? cannot be the current change undone, highlighted or whatever?? It should be one of the most important options to show the user, where that one bad klick ended up, not to hide from them! Who is supposed to find such a change in such a chaotic interface?

I normally like CPF, but this is so bad. Why is there two tabs "Firewall" & also "Defense"? this belongs in one tab. And in "Firewall" there is even two other tabs, "common" & "advanced", which is causing even more confusion. Can anyone tell me, where to unlock that bad setting? I can´t find any reference to rundll32.dll.

pardon, but that is something you maybe should think over a bit, the new interface is looking nice, but inferior to the older version regarding how it is organized.

Edit:

after almost 2 hours of searching the settings over & over, i managed to find it in

defence -> computer security policy -> application system activity control -> process access rights -> modify --> blocked applications

Does anyone see, what i mean? There should be a general tab on top of all controls, listing all blocked applications & not been hidden 6 layers below the surface.

[Melih]

Sorry if i have to say this, but you new interface is such a mess!! I made ONE wrong klick, & i just cannot find where this &§%$ setting ended up. What is this? I cannot access the sound settings anymore, nor other important settings, Firewall causing a block saying "rundll32.dll is not a valid Win32 Application". This is what´s gonna happen to a lot of people, so they won´t be able to find the spot where to correct this, come on.

WHY?? cannot be the current change undone, highlighted or whatever?? It should be one of the most important options to show the user, where that one bad klick ended up, not to hide from them! Who is supposed to find such a change in such a chaotic interface?

I normally like CPF, but this is so bad. Why is there two tabs "Firewall" & also "Defense"? this belongs in one tab. And in "Firewall" there is even two other tabs, "common" & "advanced", which is causing even more confusion. Can anyone tell me, where to unlock that bad setting? I can´t find any reference to rundll32.dll.

pardon, but that is something you maybe should think over a bit, the new interface is looking nice, but inferior to the older version regarding how it is organized.

Edit:

after almost 2 hours of searching the settings over & over, i managed to find it in

defence -> computer security policy -> application system activity control -> process access rights -> modify --> blocked applications

Does anyone see, what i mean? There should be a general tab on top of all controls, listing all blocked applications & not been hidden 6 layers below the surface.

Abr

Thanks for the rant post , can you pls now tell us how you would like to improve it.
Just saying you are ugly, doesn't help the person as to how they should improve. We very much value your input as to how we can improve this. Pls go ahead and provide us mocks of how you see this can be improved. Please provide as many mocks as possible showing how we should improve, we will be grateful.

thank you

Melih

[Arkangyal]

Welcome aboard. This firewall won'be released tomorrow, this community got opinions/ideas - like i had above you - which we are sharing with the creators of the firewall, which is >FREE<. Have a  and come up with some ideas !

PS: should a moderator close this or change the name since there is a new version already.

[Arkangyal]

These aren't really bugs - i reported one with nero's updater anyway, to defend people's health :

1. Zz.. guys, i got real pain (i feel it in my head, really) when i have to run an installer or an updater (like nero burning rom's) contains plenty of components. While the first part is that cfp will asks permissions for every child installers the second is when i run an actual application and from that i'll open either help files, a sub window (another application) or webpage.

2. Ctfmon

3. Both are trusted applications but cfp will ask for permission to run it from the another. Example: yourtrustedfile.exe from total commander or from windows explorer. This is something, which can be a good thing if the opener isn't trusted. Maybe this issue is related to the first one, i'm not sure.

I wonder if you can create a WIZARD to installer (ex. Run installer wizard) files so cfp creates exceptions for every child process, how about it? Opinion?

[rcbblgy]

I think CFP should add a function in the interface , search rules or search words . If there are many rules in CFP , it is diffcult to find one of them .

[Little Mac]

I wonder if you can create a WIZARD to installer (ex. Run installer wizard) files so cfp creates exceptions for every child process, how about it? Opinion?

There has been a rather lengthy discussion (possibly more than one) in the past.  I have very strongly suggested that there be an "Installation Mode" wherein CFP would Allow the necessary changes during the installation without asking the user, but would log all of them into a separate log (like a text file) so that the user could examine all the changes.  At the same time, ONLY the install would be allowed freely; any and all other applications would have the normal rules and settings apply.  So only the installation that the user has selected would be run in "Install Mode," logged, but everything else would be as normal so you don't open up your system.

That way the user doesn't have to switch to Allow All or disable the FW entirely, just to install an application.  And, they'd have a log of all the changes.

LM

[Tags:]