Comodo needs to develop a better site rating advisor product than ones available

[Guest]

[disinter1]

Even though I know they have a product like that already (VE), they need to get the best of these products like siteadvisor and blend it in Comodo style into VE. It would be where the siteadvisor icon would be in IE or Firefox etc. But the main point in this is that siteadvisor runs heavy, gives out false info alot and sucks, Trend protect is lighter, gives malware sites green checks alot which is very bad, and sucks too, RgGuard is fairly ok, and Finjan SecureBrowsing is prob the best of them but fails to catch active phishing sites sometimes. For Comodo to get the best of these products and make it their own would get so many thousands of users switching from Mcafee to Comodo quick, and don't forget Sitehound, LinkScanner, and especially Haute Secure which is prob gonna be the best one when it's done for now. Now the ones I just mention I think have pay versions and free versions, now if Comodo could get the stuff people would pay for and make it even better then make it free, Comodo style! I think this would add alot to Comodo and add even more loyal customers who won't give Comodo a chance with the other products you have, well enough blabbering from me, have a nice day.

[seed.helper]

great suggestion !

lets wait ... 

[Melih]

Even though I know they have a product like that already, they need to get the best of these products like siteadvisor and blend it in Comodo style. It would be where the siteadvisor icon would be in IE or Firefox etc. But the main point in this is that siteadvisor runs heavy, gives out false info alot and sucks, Trend protect is lighter, gives malware sites green checks alot, but still sucks, RgGuard is fairly ok, and Finjan SecureBrowsing is prob the best of them but fails to catch active phishing sites sometimes. For Comodo to get the best of these products and make it their own would get so many thousands of users switching from Mcafee to Comodo quick, and don't forget Sitehound, LinkScanner, and especially Haute Secure which is prob gonna be the best one when it's done for now. Now the ones I just mention I think have pay versions and free versions, now if Comodo could get the stuff people would pay for and make it even better then make it free, Comodo style! I think this would add alot to Comodo and add even more loyal customers who won't give Comodo a chance with the other products you have, well enough blabbering from me, have a nice day.

thanks for this.
what would be great for us, is for you to help us identify which features you would like to see in VE. You can list the ones we don't have according to priority and give us examples of features.
this will make our live much easier as we don't have to guess about which features are important to our users.

thanks
Melih

[Tesk]

Sorry, this isn't my topic, but I want to suggest some features.

Make a system with a crawler or something like that. It tests by some automatic functions a internet site, by downloading .exe's and the rest of the potetial harmfull files. (it would be a good feature for increasing you antivirus-database)

Then a function that I really miss in other Siteadvisors. The ability to block automatic downloads. Like when you are entering a site and some software is being downloaded without your notice. Then this product should detect it and warn the user.

Maybe a heustic engine against new viruses (not a anti-virus but only a heustic-engine, there is scanning all downloads before or while it is being downloaded to your harddrive).

And then a anti-pishing filter.

Just some suggestions.

I hope you understand what I wrote. Else just reply, then I will try to explain it. 

[Melih]

Sorry, this isn't my topic, but I want to suggest some features.

Make a system with a crawler or something like that. It tests by some automatic functions a internet site, by downloading .exe's and the rest of the potetial harmfull files. (it would be a good feature for increasing you antivirus-database)

Then a function that I really miss in other Siteadvisors. The ability to block automatic downloads. Like when you are entering a site and some software is being downloaded without your notice. Then this product should detect it and warn the user.

Maybe a heustic engine against new viruses (not a anti-virus but only a heustic-engine, there is scanning all downloads before or while it is being downloaded to your harddrive).

And then a anti-pishing filter.

Just some suggestions.

I hope you understand what I wrote. Else just reply, then I will try to explain it. 

Thanks for that.
The feature you refer to against Drive-by-download attacks ( Like when you are entering a site and some software is being downloaded without your notice) is already available in our CMG product (Comodo Memory Guardian).

Melih

[Tesk]

I didn't know that. But it would be better if it was in a toolbar, because I think it is "the home of such a feature". Of course it is better could be built in in many kinds of software but it should be in a SiteAdvisor at least.

[disinter1]

I will respond soon with my ideas and thoughts for a site advisor, but I am so busy I have no time right now, but soon! So in the meantime everyone who read this, which is alot should put in their ideas for producing a good site advisor, come on people!

[disinter1]

Well, for starters I've noticed in some forums/threads that many users are having to start using two advisors, for example using Mcafee siteadvisor and Finjan, because both have opposing strong points with siteadvisor having the strong commmunity checking sites and Finjan having realtime anti-phishing methods. Ok, well I believe we don't have to use many to get a clear idea if we should avoid a site or not, and in reality many people choose not to use an advisor because:

1. They don't like being told what's good or what's bad
2. Uses too many resources and slows down computer and web surfing
3. Too many false positives
4. Too many sites not kept up to date/ too slow to update
5. Don't want to PAY for having the best features, when the free one lacks mostly the best stuff/config.
6. Doesn't trust the company providing the advisor
7. Doesn't work
8. Lacks important/cool features.

Well, I want a second opinion this is why I choose to use a advisor, and to avoid phishing scams and such...like when I'm on Ebay, I better be on ebay or I'm screwed! Here is a list of some if not all the advisors etc. that I know of, some are good and some I wouldn't even try out, so search and use at your own risk. Now if Comodo can start development of one of these, I think many people can stop looking for the most balanced out advisor, and just settle with Comodo.

zone alarm ForceField
McAfee SiteAdvisor
TrendProtect
TrustWatch
Finjan SecureBrowsing
CallingID
StopBadware
Haute Secure
Linkscanner
Robot Genius RGguard
Scandoo
Sitehound

-------------------------------------------------------------------
My wishlist (not in great detail )
1. Have the option to say what you think is bad, I know some advisors have that like to consider porn a red check or just leave it alone and let the phishing scanner decide to see if it's bad or not.

2. Have community based ratings and realtime phishing detection, so incase if that "good" site ever decides to go bad, Comodo will detect it first hand without even having people check to see if remains clean.

I'll think of more later, until next time.

[Melih]

Well, for starters I've noticed in some forums/threads that many users are having to start using two advisors, for example using Mcafee siteadvisor and Finjan, because both have opposing strong points with siteadvisor having the strong commmunity checking sites and Finjan having realtime anti-phishing methods. Ok, well I believe we don't have to use many to get a clear idea if we should avoid a site or not, and in reality many people choose not to use an advisor because:

1. They don't like being told what's good or what's bad
2. Uses too many resources and slows down computer and web surfing
3. Too many false positives
4. Too many sites not kept up to date/ too slow to update
5. Don't want to PAY for having the best features, when the free one lacks mostly the best stuff/config.
6. Doesn't trust the company providing the advisor
7. Doesn't work
8. Lacks important/cool features.

Well, I want a second opinion this is why I choose to use a advisor, and to avoid phishing scams and such...like when I'm on Ebay, I better be on ebay or I'm screwed! Here is a list of some if not all the advisors etc. that I know of, some are good and some I wouldn't even try out, so search and use at your own risk. Now if Comodo can start development of one of these, I think many people can stop looking for the most balanced out advisor, and just settle with Comodo.

zone alarm ForceField
McAfee SiteAdvisor
TrendProtect
TrustWatch
Finjan SecureBrowsing
CallingID
StopBadware
Haute Secure
Linkscanner
Robot Genius RGguard
Scandoo
Sitehound

-------------------------------------------------------------------
My wishlist (not in great detail )
1. Have the option to say what you think is bad, I know some advisors have that like to consider porn a red check or just leave it alone and let the phishing scanner decide to see if it's bad or not.

2. Have community based ratings and realtime phishing detection, so incase if that "good" site ever decides to go bad, Comodo will detect it first hand without even having people check to see if remains clean.

I'll think of more later, until next time.

Excellent Feedback disinter1, we look forward to more pls..

what else would like to see from an advisor like tool? we would love to hear everyone's opinion.. also all the dislikes of the current solutions so that we don't fall for the same traps.

thanks
Melih

[UncleDoug]

Melih,  with the VE  the "White List" speeds up loading, but as I mentioned in another thread, a black list should also be incorporated for known malware sites.  A good site today might be targeted and infected 3 months from now, so both lists will always be changing.   

What would be handy in the black list is the reason why!  I know of one site, in which they have outstanding software, but you need to be careful what you click on as some advertised links look like their downloads but look very questionable to me.  Similar to Google ads promoting questionable sites.

In another thread I mentioned that the user should be given a convenient way to send links directly back to Comodo for evaluation.  With that link would be primarily be for new sites, but there should also be an option for a user to notify the Comodo Team that a site rated Good may have a malware page (with a small area to mention why.)
 Pages 1,  2, and 3 may be Good but 4, and 5 either Bad show a drive by or questionable downloads or ads.

The VE would go from the White List and if not found to the Black List, and then for undocumented sites, offer the user to send the site to Comodo for evaluation. 
With only one list being processed at a time the resource usage will remain low. 

Melih can a phising filter be built in, or as the White List and Black List grow a phising filter will no longer be needed, allowing the user to turn off any phising programs they use?

UncleDoug

[Melih]

you are on the right line UncleDoug....

[disinter1]

Just to let you guys know that AVG recently bought linkscanner which was listed on my list as shown in a few post above this one, that's interesting to say the least.

[Tags:]