Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 21, 2013, 03:57:10 AM

Login with username, password and session length

663345 Posts
70521 Topics
145175 Members

Latest Member: ChristianF

Search:     Advanced search | Tag Cloud
+  Welcome to the Comodo Forum
|-+  Archived Boards
| |-+  Discontinued Products
| | |-+  Comodo Memory Firewall(Buffer Overflow Protection)
| | | |-+  Comodo Memory Firewall Beta Corner
| | | | |-+  CMF fails this test, apparently
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: CMF fails this test, apparently  (Read 8001 times)
qwerty
Comodo Loves me
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


« on: January 05, 2008, 06:29:49 AM »

Hi all, I came across this thread at wilders, apparently CMF fails all 5 tests. Sad
 Test is downloadable here.(scroll down)
Logged
gibran
Average User
Comodo's Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5056


A bad workman always blames his tools


« Reply #1 on: January 05, 2008, 07:30:48 AM »

Yep this has already been discussed. CMF block api calls from BO so if POCs are only used to demonstrate Buffer Overflows there would be no way to block those.
Anyway any malicious code needs to call some API to accomplish something so real exploits will be catched by SMF.

It would be interesting to run Comodo BO tester 3rd test against BufferShield. It should fail.
Also CMF should protect your PC if some malware disable widows enforced hardware DEP.

I looked at that thread and found out http://www.sys-manage.com/PRODUCTS/BufferShield/PreventedExploits/tabid/63/Default.aspx CFM is not mentioned I guess that someone could ask them to include it in their tested products list Grin
« Last Edit: January 05, 2008, 07:39:53 AM by gibran » Logged

"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."- Douglas Adams
qwerty
Comodo Loves me
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


« Reply #2 on: January 05, 2008, 07:17:02 PM »

I'm a bit confused here... so does CMF actually prevent BO's from occurring, or does it just limit what the BO can do?
From what you said, it looks like the latter?
Logged
gibran
Average User
Comodo's Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5056


A bad workman always blames his tools


« Reply #3 on: January 06, 2008, 01:47:54 AM »

I'm a bit confused here... so does CMF actually prevent BO's from occurring, or does it just limit what the BO can do?
From what you said, it looks like the latter?

IIRC BO cannot be prevented. BO can be detected and the offending proces killed. That's what CMF will do. If a BO is exploited then an API will be called.
Logged

"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."- Douglas Adams
atomas31
Comodo Loves me
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 120


« Reply #4 on: January 07, 2008, 11:48:39 AM »

Yep this has already been discussed. CMF block api calls from BO so if POCs are only used to demonstrate Buffer Overflows there would be no way to block those.
Anyway any malicious code needs to call some API to accomplish something so real exploits will be catched by SMF.

It would be interesting to run Comodo BO tester 3rd test against BufferShield. It should fail.
Also CMF should protect your PC if some malware disable widows enforced hardware DEP.

I looked at that thread and found out http://www.sys-manage.com/PRODUCTS/BufferShield/PreventedExploits/tabid/63/Default.aspx CFM is not mentioned I guess that someone could ask them to include it in their tested products list Grin

Hi,

How does CMF compare, in term of security, to Buffershield?
From the link in your test, how many "green hook" could CMF have/had and against wich of this exploit does CMF doesn't protect us?

Thanks,
Atomas31
Logged
gibran
Average User
Comodo's Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5056


A bad workman always blames his tools


« Reply #5 on: January 07, 2008, 01:55:42 PM »

Hi,

How does CMF compare, in term of security, to Buffershield?
From the link in your test, how many "green hook" could CMF have/had and against wich of this exploit does CMF doesn't protect us?

Thanks,
Atomas31

I cannot test those exploit myself Shocked as those are only link to advisories that give exploit specifics. I guess that is up to BS developers to add CFM and Microsoft HW DEP too.
From a thecnical standpoint. CMF catch some exploits that could be catched by MS HW dep and also some exploit that ms HW dep doesn't catch.
DS developers tested only MS software dep (that is MS not hardware supported DEP used on old CPUs).

As it turns out MS enforced dep could be disabled in some cases so CMF will provide protection in such scenarios too.
Logged

"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."- Douglas Adams
atomas31
Comodo Loves me
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 120


« Reply #6 on: January 08, 2008, 03:28:08 PM »

Well, I hope BS developper will add CMF to there tests...

As for me, I have tried CMF but after two BSOD causes by the addition of CMF, I remove it from my system  Cry

I hope Comodo will solved the BSOD issue soon...

I have windows XP with SP2, Nod32 2.70.39, Comodo Boclean and Prosecurity 1.41 and Rollback Rx 8.1 and when BSOD happens I had Utorrent downloading in background, Mailwasher pro 6.1 in the tray bar, and I was navigating with Firefox on comodo website (both times) and listening music with Winamp 5.50....

Best regards,
Atomas31
Logged
condar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #7 on: March 17, 2008, 05:12:41 PM »

Hi


It would be interesting to run Comodo BO tester 3rd test against BufferShield. It should fail.
Also CMF should protect your PC if some malware disable widows enforced hardware DEP.

I looked at that thread and found out http://www.sys-manage.com/PRODUCTS/BufferShield/PreventedExploits/tabid/63/Default.aspx CFM is not mentioned I guess that someone could ask them to include it in their tested products list Grin

Well. Buffershield didn´t pass the Comodo BO Tester... Tongue
Logged
3xist
Guest
« Reply #8 on: May 31, 2008, 04:38:22 AM »

Locked.

Reason: Out-Dated post.

Josh
Logged
Tags:
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

SSL Certificate Free Virus Removal Firewall
Page created in 0.055 seconds with 22 queries.
Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines Design by 7dana.com