I’m a newbie around here and rarely post (but lurk, on occasion). For what it is worth, here’s my 2 cents, on this issue:
The company distributing PCSecurityShield has a well-known reputation as a rogue company. It is important to note that, the reputation is primarily due to their sleazy marketing. There products (at least recently) are legitimate security products, but the way they choose to sell and distribute these products is suspect. One can take the association with Comodo as a sign that PCSecurityShield is a REAL security product.
Comodo has every right to sell the rights to their engine for rebranding. This is NOT contrary to their offering the free firewall for life, as they still do that under their own brand. And, has been noted, PCSecurityShield offers free tech support, so it is clear that they offer more than a simple rebranded Comodo firewall.
Again, as has been noted already, the “rogue” designation is from some time ago. Perhaps PCSecurityShield is changing their approach, and no longer engages in misleading scans, and such. I don’t know that they have stopped these practices, but I am suggesting that they may no longer do these things, and the security community hasn’t noticed yet. I tend to doubt things have changed too much, with them. Most companies who claim to have reformed, do so for a limited time, or in a limited way…yet, they continue to straddle the line between what is acceptable and what isn’t. Companies looking closely at that line, and always look for an opportunity to exploit the line, almost invariably cross it, at some point. As PCSecurityShield is a MARKETING company, and not a SECURITY company, I assume their sole concern is for the bottom line.
My opinion is, if they are serious about changing their methods, then this is a non-issue. If, however, they are still engaging in questionable marketing, then Comodo would be wise to terminate any association with them. As we all know, things are bad out there, REAL BAD. Any monetary support for a company actively involved in muddying the waters and adding to the confusion as to what is, and isn’t, legitimate practice, would be disgraceful. Comodo’s reputation will surely be compromised if PCSecurityShield is deemed to still be dirty, and Comodo continues to do business with them.
I have to confess to a total disdain for “affiliate marketing” and “pay per download” distribution. They are the Internet’s dirty little secret. If I were King, I would attempt to abolish them, altogether. Of course, that will not happen. But, as a consumer, I make every attempt to steer clear from products and services engaged in these practices, and as a professional I try not to use or recommend these products. Obviously, it is impossible to use NO products engaged in these practices, as they are already too well established. But, make no mistake about it, when you engage in deals with individuals and companies whose actions you cannot control, you are very likely to get burned.
As a long time user of Comodo (and a computer tech who installs and recommends the product on a daily basis), I trust Comodo to properly investigate the situation and make the correct decision. If everything turns out to be clean and above-board, I hope the contract is lucrative for Comodo, so they can continue to develop and distribute such excellent products. However, if PCSecurityShield turns out to still be a suspect company (and we will know soon enough) and Comodo continues to support them, I will be using, installing and recommending another product.
