Matousec - Outpost 99%

[Guest]

[salmonela]

Matousec news:

We have a new leader in our Firewall Challenge. Outpost Firewall Pro 2009 6.5.2355.316.0597 scored 99% and was close to a perfect score! Another product tested today – Jetico Personal Firewall 2.0.2.4.2264 – scored amazingly well compared to its previously tested version. The difference between old and new Jetico Personal Firewall is almost 50%. We have also tested Ashampoo FireWall FREE 1.20 and G DATA InternetSecurity 2008 but their results are not worth mentioning.

View article...

[Kyle]

Well done to outpost, Lets hope Comodo can steal it away again.

[3xist]

The CFP 3 version tested was v 3.0.22 We are 3.0.25 going onto another update... So yes the leaks have been fixed.

Josh

[Ragwing]

While Comodo didn't reach 100%, it's the only one that got 'Level 10+'.
Anyways, let's wait until the latest version of CFP 3 has been tested

Cheers,
Ragwing

[halfcack]

Did Outpost license threat sense from ESET, (nod 32) to gain the 99%?

[Vettetech]

Threat sense is part of NOD32's virus scan and has nothing to do with firewall policy's.

[patrice58]

http://www.matousec.com/projects/firewall-challenge/results.php  Comodo is slipping

[doktornotor]

Comodo is slipping

Hmmm? Been #3 in the last test as well, so not really sure what do you mean by slipping?  Honestly I feel their testing methodology is slipping, if anything. Some of their tests are highly questionable wrt. their usefulness in the real world... 

[Melih]

we chose not to pay to get our latest version tested which was released in May. As you will see that version, since May does not fail what Matousec reports that we fail. However they require us to pay to test again. Now, our concern is protecting end users and we are quite happy with the security we provide as its well known to be one of the best, if not the best for providing malware protection. Our concern is not for paying for the top spot. So if Matousec wants to test our latest version which was out since May then go ahead, but we are not going to pay for it just to be on top again!

Go ahead and test what Matousec claim we fail on, you will see that latest version released in May passes those. We rather spend that money on our developers!

Melih

[3xist]

The CEO of Comodo said it all.

Comodo has so far passed all of the leak tests from Matousec. We have mentioned this COUNTLESS times. Stability, Usability & Real Threat protection is the key. Not paying a company for a top spot in leak tests.

Melih is doing the right thing and so is Comodo, Spending $$ on R&D & building more high quality products & continuing to improve existing.

Josh

[doktornotor]

Go ahead and test what Matousec claim we fail on, you will see that latest version released in May passes those. We rather spend that money on our developers!

Well said.... 

[giraffe]

Yes indeed. I can understand that Matousec has to have income, but at the same time there is a suspiscion that paying for a test...!

[Star Shadow]

I think the payment is to stop all the firewall makers from wanting a retest at the same time. It takes a lot of time to test each firewall, so if a company paid for a test, then that firewall has priority, but if all companies asked for one at the same time, then he would be swamped to make deadlines. So, it's for as much his benefit in several ways ... maybe.

[3xist]

Yes indeed. I can understand that Matousec has to have income, but at the same time there is a suspiscion that paying for a test...!

It's for them to make $$ and keep vendors fighting over stupid leak tests.

Cheers,
Josh

[jrx10]

What the heck happened to ZApro? It seems like it used to do fairly well in the tests. I've seen posts on non-computer boards where posters crow about using ZAfree, & it blocking "10 million" or so unsolicited inbound attempts. 

[Tags:]