CIS V4 Video

[Guest]

[FreewareHobo]

Me wants to try toooo!! 

[EricJH]

Thanks for this first introduction to the upcoming v4. Looking forward to see another one.

[JoWa]

I also noticed that the box for "create rules for known safe applications" was not checked. I would definitely have that box ticked.

Why? Only reason to create rules I can see is if you switch from Safe Mode/Clean PC Mode to Paranoid Mode and don't want to get alerts for safe applications that have already run.

[PhyxionNL]

Next time no tick tack noise please, very annoying :p I'm kinda suspicious about this though, will it work fine? Can't you just fake a safe vendor?

[youmingshi]

I can't wait!

[panic]

Next time no tick tack noise please, very annoying :p I'm kinda suspicious about this though, will it work fine? Can't you just fake a safe vendor?

How would they fake the code signing certificate in the executable??

[tcarrbrion]

I have just noticed "create rules for known safe applications". This is a great improvement and will greatly reduce the rule size in registry. I just hope you can still create rules manually, if you want to.

[eXPerience]

Nice one Languy !

eXp

[SS26]

Author, thanks for the video.  I`m glad Comodo still provide ability to opt out from AV 

[Dch48]

If you have The Comodo Firewall and D+, I don't think it matters what AV you use since they all are mostly redundant in that scenario. You might as well just stick with CAV which does it's job very well within the package of CIS. In V4 we are promised it will be much better and I intend to use the full package just like I do now but without the CTM feature.

[ssj100]

If you have The Comodo Firewall and D+, I don't think it matters what AV you use since they all are mostly redundant in that scenario. You might as well just stick with CAV which does it's job very well within the package of CIS. In V4 we are promised it will be much better and I intend to use the full package just like I do now but without the CTM feature.

CTM is going to be separate anyway.

[Dch48]

CTM is going to be separate anyway.

I know that but I think there is an option to use it if you have it installed.

[EricJH]

I know that but I think there is an option to use it if you have it installed.

True. It is CTM aware.

[SS26]

(bolded by me)

If you have The Comodo Firewall and D+, I don't think it matters what AV you use since they all are mostly redundant in that scenario.

Exactly - realtime AV is redundant.

[Happy-Dude]

Hey languy, I love your videos (simple and straightforward-- which is good), but I got a slight concern about the reviews:

I feel as if you don't use the programs to their maximum capability.

Like for ThreatFire (Sept video), there was an option to quarantine and kill the process, which might've saved some hassle later on. Also, you did a rootkit scan after you did a Malwarebytes AntiMalware scan, which didn't give an accurate representation of what the rootkit scanner was capable of.

In your Avast video (Oct video, version 4., I think it would have definitely preformed better with a boot time scan and if the scanner sensitivity was set to high.

It seems that time is an issue with many of your vids. I'm sure you can definitely pause/ edit out the useless parts (such as booting up and downloading) to scrap the most out of those ~10 minutes.

I understand why you usually keep the settings at their out-of-box state (because the philosophy is that usually people don't tweak them and the default settings should already provide adequate protection). But for a full-fledged review, it doesn't give an accurate representation of the programs you test.

I love your videos for your comments, real time testing, and overview of the most basic capabilities. But for a full review (instead of a general overview) of its capabilities, maybe you should look into the program more? Sometimes some of the most powerful and useful features are in the advanced settings, not the default ones (like some of CIS's and the toggle switch and even some of Spybot's-- though for Spybot's tools, its a bit harder to use/ understand). Calling the videos a review might be a bit of a stretch if some of these capabilities aren't shown... (Perhaps there should be a disclaimer note in your video information box telling people of what the video tries to show so many don't get mislead?)

Thanks very much for your time!! I really hope you don't find this reply offensive or anything; it's just some constructive criticism that I hope you take to heart . I look forward to more of your stuff .

[Tags:]