A new version of CIS will be out soon with the Memory Firewall built in, for now, however you may wish to install both.
Is this still true? Here's why I ask...
On my 1+ year old HP laptop, I'm using version 3.5 of the standalone firewall (though I'll soon be updating it to the new INTERNET SECURITY product). However, today (13 Feb 2009) I downloaded and installed COMODO INTERNET SECURITY version 3.8.64263.468
on a new Dell laptop that I just got for my wife...
...and so, then, after installation, when I open it up and go to: Defense+
> Image Execution Control Settings
and view the "General" tab of the "Image Execution Control Settings" dialog, I see a little checkbox (that I've never seen in any previous stand-alone Comodo firewall product) labeled "Detect shellcode injections (i.e. Buffer overflow protection)
" at the very bottom.
I dunno about you, but that sounds an awful lot like what the MEMORY FIREWALL product does! No?
Is that, in fact, the same thing that COMODO MEMORY FIREWALL does? Or does MEMORY FIREWALL do something other
than (or in addition to) that which still warrants its installation alongside the INTERNET SECURITY product?
What I'm hoping is that the INTERNET SECURITY product been updated since Jim's post to which I'm replying so that it now, indeed, includes what the MEMORY FIREWALL product has always done, as Jim predicted in his 1/6/2009 posting. Someone please tell me that that's the case!
I know at least one
thing for sure: That little checkbox is certainly not present in the stand-alone firewall version 3.5.57173.439 that I have on my older HP notebook. It's obviously new (though how
new is unclear) to the INTERNET SECURITY product; and I'm hoping that it's new since Jim's posting of 1/6/2009.
If it's true that the INTERNET SECURITY product now does what the MEMORY FIREWALL product has always done, then is it safe for me to assume that the MEMORY FIREWALL product can now be deleted from any of my machines onto which I have also installed the newest version of the INTERNET SECURITY product? If not, then why in the heck hasn't everything
that MEMORY FIREWALL does been added to the INTERNET SECURITY product? It's really weird to have two products on one's machine which call themselves some kind of "firewall" (even if one of them is only a "memory" firewall); and it's even weirder for any product which calls itself a full-blown firewall (as the firewall in the new INTERNET SECURITY product claims) to not protect against buffer overflow attacks. Hopefully, the latest version of INTERNET SECURITY makes it all moot.
If the MEMORY FIREWALL product is no longer necessary for those who have the latest/greatest version of the INTERNET SECURITY product, THEN SOMEONE PLEASE UPDATE THE APPROPRIATE PRODUCT DESCRIPTION AREAS OF THE MAIN WEB SITE
! At the very least, the product description (and possibly also the download) area of the COMODO MEMORY FIREWALL product description/information area of the main web site needs to be updated to inform the site visitor that what the MEMORY FIREWALL product does is now included in the INTERNET SECURITY product. Frankly, a note to that effect in the INTERNET SECURITY product description/information area (and proably the download area, too) wouldn't hurt either.
Just my two cents worth... which my ex-wife will happily point out is about all
it's worth. UPDATE:
My question has been answered in another thread... and the answer is yes, what the Memory Firewall product has always done is now present in the new Internet Security product. So, then, it is no longer necessary to run them both. Running the Internet Security product is sufficient; and anyone running version 3.8 (or higher) of it may uninstall the Memory Firewall product altogether.
SEE: http://forums.comodo.com/defense_help/buffer_overflow_attack_protection-t34459.0.html(And with that, were I the moderator around here, I'd close this thread so that no more knuckleheads like me will ask the question here when it has been covered well elsewhere. However, for a short time at least, I'd also consider making this thread sticky here in the Memory Firewall forum... but that's just me.)