What is this? (The Shield Firewall 5.0)

[Guest]

[axl]

I am curious, as the PCSecurityShield is still listed as a rogue in Spyware Warrior, still Red X'd by SiteAdvisor and stands accused of marketing by spam by more than one security forum, why would you consider this issue resolved?

The CEO came in and the last thing he wrote was this:
"Arthur has been open and has come and explained himself (including his efforts to try get himself off that list).
Anything else we can do? pls let me know.."

See the question he asked?
Is there anything else?

From his statement it is clear to me that this has been settled, so he is asking if there is anything else.
I trust the CEO, so if he feels it is settled, that is good enough for me.

Of course, it may not be good enough for you, but as I said previously, this is not a democracy, an open-source project or a non-profit organization.
If you disagree with the policy, you have every right to use another product, or even rally some of the other disgruntled users here to leave and create a splinter organization, like some linux distributions have done...
I would have suggested OpenComodo, but unfortunately I believe "Comodo" is a trademark.

Regards,
axl.

[The Dean]

Melih has (re-read his last post, carefully), and as for the community "passing" this, I was unaware that this operation was a democracy...
In fact, with regards to the "community", this is not some open-source project, and this is not a non-profit organisation.

THIS is Melih's last post, and I read it carefully:

In this case, maybe someone should get in touch with them and ask them about the above issue!?

Melih

As for the community's response, I never suggested nor implied that it was a democracy and I CLEARLY understand it is a for-profit operation.  (Have you read MY posts?)  Comodo will do whatever Comodo wants to do, I think that's clear.  But, based on Mehil's openness (and his posts clearly indicate that he is still open for information) I'm betting he will consider the reaction to the community (Comodo's community and the security community) in his decision.

The community plays an important role in any security product.  If it, indeed, turns out that PCSecurityShield is NOT totally on the up and up with their tactics, the community (that is, the security community) WILL take notice.  Security-related blogs have already begun to question the arrangement.  It will take a little more than the owner of PCSecurityShield's word that everything is AOK to convince them otherwise.   

But, it is clear that I am talking a bit over your head, on this.  So, let's just leave it at that.

[axl]

But, it is clear that I am talking a bit over your head, on this.  So, let's just leave it at that.

I think by now the community knows who is in over his head from who isn't, thanks.
Why not create a poll and see who agrees with you?
Maybe when you see that the majority see this as a non-issue you will get a clue.

Regards,
axl.

[axl]

THIS is Melih's last post, and I read it carefully:

I am amazed at your willingness to show your ignorance.
It is obvious that this response is a tongue-in-cheek suggestion to Red that if he is so knowledgeable about how easily the two individuals can be contacted, that he could volunteer to get more information.
Even Floyd, with his high-school forum mentality, caught this; I guess "The Dean" was out to lunch..

As I said before, this is a pointless exercise.

Best wishes,
axl.

[panic]

I am curious, as the PCSecurityShield is still listed as a rogue in Spyware Warrior, still Red X'd by SiteAdvisor and stands accused of marketing by spam by more than one security forum, why would you consider this issue resolved?

Dean,

I believe he was just queryng how much value our collective postings are having.

Ewen :-)

[The Dean]

Dean,

I believe he was just queryng how much value our collective postings are having.

Ewen :-)

I hear that, and much of the back and forth is tedious and unproductive. 

Ewen, I notice that there is no mention of Comodo on The Shield page, as there is for Kaspersky, F-Secure and Hauri on their respective product pages.  Do you know if that was a conscious decision by Comodo?

Thanks

EDIT:  It occurs to me that, since Comodo is free, it is probably unwise for PCSecurityShield to publicize that they use their product.

[panic]

Whether conscious or not, I imagine it would have been a decision done by the guy that owns the page.

Ewen :-)

[Kebab]

I always knew there was something fishy with this hyped marketing fart called Comodo.
I just installed it once, got rid of it with lots of hassling, have and will NEVER install this smellware again.

Good luck to you, fanboys.

P.S. Don't forget that Comodo was hyped with the help of investigation agencies. Their backdoors are strictly followed by your beloved firewall called Comodo. 

[panic]

P.S. Don't forget that Comodo was hyped with the help of investigation agencies. Their backdoors are strictly followed by your beloved firewall called Comodo. 

Que?

[psych1610]

Thanks Panic, I was just gonna say the same thing. You beat me to it!

So.. que?

[axl]

Ya, anyone else noticed how many "new" members decided to come out of the shadows just to contribute to this thread?

Hmmmm......

 

[qwerty]

It would appear that poor Arthur, of pcsecurityshield has very much been a victim of circumstance, and that everyone else is to blame for the position his company now finds itself in.

Paying adware authors to advertise his products on victims pcs?

DSLReports is even older than Spyware Warrior and that does not even talk about our products but apparently some marketing methods.

Yeah, right. So paying adware authors to display ads on victims pc is simply a "marketing method"? Welp, nothing wrong with that then. 
 

Since things never go away once they are on the internet, isn't it a consumers responsibility to take note of when they were posted before they put them down as fact?

Hahaha. It is the responsibility of every user to ignore anything written prior to the present day. It is completely up to the consumer to be responsible, my company bears no responsibility whatsoever for its past actions.

Site Advisor (http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/pcsecurityshield.com) has told us that even through they have downloaded and tested our software 21 times (check their site) and found NO issues, they still will not correct our "rating" until SpywareWarrior does.

 Funny that, when i do check SA's site, I see

Feedback from credible users indicates this site engaged in one or more negative or undesired activities.

After entering our e-mail address on this site, we received 2.7 e-mails per week. They were somewhat spammy.

And reading the comments at the bottom of the page, in amongst them was this little gem of a screenshot, care to explain this? (note this was taken less than 2 months ago)
 http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/3252/pcsecurityshieldfullofcvp2.png

 

[axl]

and so the trolling continues...

[axl]

TBH, I must say that even though this thread has been most annoying, it has also been most enlightening...
IMHO True colors have been revealed with regards to who really believes in and supports Comodo...

 

[Rednose]

YES, OFCOURCE I DON'T SUPPORT COMODO, that's why I got a pm from Kevin last week in wich he thanked me for my effort to help here on the forum. So please shut up Axl

Greetz, Red.

[Tags:]