Add sandbox feature into CIS

[Guest]

[misuzu02]

Okay, I'm new here and I'm not too sure what to say and also not too sure if this is the correct station for this, but I just thought maybe add a sandbox feature into CIS in the future version?  It's may have some use to some user if they want to browser the internet in a sandbox

[PhyxionNL]

Okay, I'm new here and I'm not too sure what to say and also not too sure if this is the correct station for this, but I just thought maybe add a sandbox feature into CIS in the future version?  It's may have some use to some user if they want to browser the internet in a sandbox

Sandbox is complete useless.

[HeffeD]

Unless something has changed, a sandbox feature is planned for a future release of CIS.

[DSP]

Sandbox is complete useless.

useless?

[Jaki]

Sandbox is complete useless.

Where did you hear that a sandbox is completely useless. Have you ever heard of sandboxie?

Peace.

[devenroy]

mostly i use sandboxie for launching programs so i dont see it as useless, Including sandboxie in CIS will be nice idea in my view.

[Dch48]

I agree that sandboxing is useless and unnecessary. Just another piece of paranoia crapware. We don't need it in CIS

[evil_religion]

How can you say that it would be useless?

It can be a comfortable method to isolate critical processes, the best way for safer surfing.

[Dch48]

Again--useless and unnecessary. CIS protects us enough without it. The other security suites do too. In my 10+ years of surfing the net and doing email, I have yet to be infected with anything or hacked by anyone. There have been attempts, but my security, first McAfee and then Norton for the last 8 years before Comodo, always caught it. The first 6 years on line, on dial-up, I never even had any kind of firewall, just AV.

Paranoia strikes deep.

[burebista]

Paranoia strikes deep.

Amen to that. 
Too much is too much IMO.

[00hmh]

Again--useless and unnecessary. CIS protects us enough without it. The other security suites do too. In my 10+ years of surfing the net and doing email, I have yet to be infected with anything or hacked by anyone. There have been attempts, but my security, first McAfee and then Norton for the last 8 years before Comodo, always caught it. The first 6 years on line, on dial-up, I never even had any kind of firewall, just AV.

Paranoia strikes deep.

I love to hear people say they have never had a  security breach or suffered a hack, therefore they can ignore new security technology.  

This of course means they don't KNOW they have had a breach, at best.  But assuming they are right it ignores the evidence that secuity problems are  rapidly escalalting and yesterday's security is no longer reliable.  

Security hysteria does exist, but it is increasingly evident that virualization of some kind will eventually be the norm.  Until our O/S is secure and there is built in virtualization  Sandboxie and other tricks are fairly reliable and relatively easy ways to increase secutiry.  So unless you rarely surf the web and it's certainly useful.  If it's too much hassle, the paranoid and others ought to be aware of the risk level.  

Blanket statements and paranoid fears are both foolish.

[andyman35]

Sandboxing is most definitely not useless unless,taking Sandboxie as an example,pro-actively preventing 99.9999% of malware infections through an isolated web-browser is useless.

Just because product A (Defence+) provides a certain level of protection,that in no way diminishes the protection afforded by product B.On top of which a sandbox uses very little system resources and common good security practice dictates that a web browser shouldn't have unfettered access to system files,registry etc.

[Budda]

If you believe in the whole philosophy of Comodo's layered security this potential feature would do nothing more but continue this trend.

[Dch48]

I love to hear people say they have never had a  security breach or suffered a hack, therefore they can ignore new security technology.  

This of course means they don't KNOW they have had a breach, at best.  But assuming they are right it ignores the evidence that secuity problems are  rapidly escalalting and yesterday's security is no longer reliable.  

Security hysteria does exist, but it is increasingly evident that virualization of some kind will eventually be the norm.  Until our O/S is secure and there is built in virtualization  Sandboxie and other tricks are fairly reliable and relatively easy ways to increase secutiry.  So unless you rarely surf the web and it's certainly useful.  If it's too much hassle, the paranoid and others ought to be aware of the risk level.  

Blanket statements and paranoid fears are both foolish.

No--I KNOW I have never had a breach. All my systems are and always have been checked by multiple scanning engines at least once a month. Nothing but harmless tracking cookies has ever been found. My nephew was into hacking for a time. He never did anything mailicious, but he was good at taking over people's systems and then owning up and telling them how he was able to do it so they could remedy the situation. I had him try to get into mine when I was using Norton Internet Security and he was unable to get past my defenses. He claimed that the Norton firewall was the hardest one to penetrate. (this was back in 2006 or so however)

Bottom line---Sandboxing is not needed. CIS is fine as it is. If you want sandboxing, make it a standalone app for those who feel they need it. Do not bloat the fine product that CIS currently is.

[OmeletGuy]

Its going to start being needed, since production of malware is going up every year and exploits are always a new thing.

Google's Chrome is already sandboxed by google.

[Tags:]