Here is a little article about what you need to know for your computer’s security.
What you need to know for your Computer Security
More than happy to expand it with further questions you may have.
thanks
Melih
Melih,
First off, GREAT JOB on fixing the D+ engine. It seems to be doing well. Also, thank you for emailing me as I had left Comodo for good(thnx support admin team). This seems to be a very well put together engine now.
Second, as the following post deals with a problem that is yet unclear but ALL ABOUT WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT OUR PC SECURITY, could you please discuss it there and provide the appropriate answer…its all about WinFW and turning it ON/OFF.
https://forums.comodo.com/firewall-help-cis/windows-firewall-onoff-t51417.0.html;msg384017#msg384017
Microsoft does recommend to thirdy party venors there application work in conjuction with the WinFW as it handles more than just FW activities.
Hi I hope you can help me, I’m new to this so bare with me couldn’t even work out how to ask a question! My virus signature database will not update and hasn’t since 30/12/09! message keeps saying failed and to check internet connection! I know it must be something to do with the settings but i cant find anything that will help and I haven’t changed any setting either? This is my last attemp to sort it, if not then i will delete comodo and try something else, If you could help i would be grateful. Thanks Strika
Hi Strika. You are probably using an older version of CIS and that will not get updated anymore. What version are you using? Look under Miscellaneous → About.
Please start a new topic in the AntiVirus Help - CIS board and tell us what version of CIS you are using.
Why is the answer for this being deflected?
1) nothing was “deflected”
2) you had answers in other thread
3) Windows native Firwall must be disabled" as any other 2nd firewall. You must have only one active !
4) I stopped reading your posts after this ugly remark
…Calm down angry clown…here
So, if any of your posts are “deflected” when you are “communicating” with users here in such disgusting manner - that is fine with me if you don’t have any attention to any of your posts
Thanks
1 & 2. The question has not been answered. Other people have posted the preference they have chosen.
- Windows native FW IS NOT required to be turned off in Avast v5(but Im not using them until they drop calls to the most comprimisable engine on a PC…ie flash). MICROSOFT THEMSLEVES RECOMMENDS that third party firewall vendors build their solution AROUND there FW…I dont care that you canty find that in Wikipedia…ask MS then come back and I will accept your apology for posting information you have decided its the way it is, not based in ANY facts.
‘Calm down Angry Clown’ is where you stopped reading. Grow up. I was being attacked for some poor lil person deciding it was completly personal. Some of you really need to go out and experience communication in the REAL world if tha comment seemed ‘ugly’. Sorry but its true. You decided it was demeaning. It was meant to lighten the mood.
Bottom Line: Unless you are Melih, stop answereing a question posted to Melih. Unless you have a partner agreement with MS od ANY sort, stop answering questions based on your wiki life. Unless you are Comodo, dont tell me how Comodo has cdesigned there suite.
YOU ARE WRONG. It IS NOT required to disable WinFW with 3rd party vendors (what is 2nd party FW anyhow, did you read that on a wiki?). The THIRD PARTY FIREWALL vendor is told when they meet the requirements of MS to be a security solution provider ‘it is recommended that all security solutions be designed around Windows basic operating framework’; this DOES include the Windows FW.
As already stated, the Windows Firewall controls more than just FW type activities. If the THIRD PARTY vendor requires the FW to be disabled THEY MUST include their own process’ to replace what is whut down ALONG with Windows FW.
MELIH…WTF(rak)? you know Im not spouting garbage yet you allow these folk to simply be here like this…its no wonder I left v3…the support hasn’t changed even though EVERY issue your staff told me wasnt an issue has now been repaired ???
Yea, I must not know what Im talking about, thats why you focused on those EXACT problems…
I have no comment relative to Melih’s article, excepting of course that it his not the property of HyJaxLTD, and consequently that Melih is free to comment further or not, particularly when “asked” to do so from double posting, in the same time when, and opposite as what is being said, other people also are allowed to write their own comments.
I am nevertheless not off topic for being entitled to a right to answer:
'Calm down Angry Clown' is where you stopped reading. Grow up. I was being attacked for some poor lil person deciding it was completly personal.
Anyone reading the topic where the quote cames from
(https://forums.comodo.com/firewall-help-cis/windows-firewall-onoff-t51417.0.html
shall realize that no one, including myself, made any personal attack.
HyJaxLTD is the one talking of “angry clown”, “poor lil person” and so on, and presents as only arguments “Microsoft said”, only contemptuously answering to anyone else that his arguments are “wiki life”, but without ascertaining, even when politely asked, what he says with appropriate sources, thus making his arguments having not less, but not more value then those systematically presented as "coming from wiki’, without either any evidence of this assumption.
Who attacks who, who is systematically offensive and contemptuous in whatever he writes?
I am quite surprised that this pemanent breaching of forum rules (attacks “ad hominem”, and of course under the belt) is not moderated.
Quoting SiberLynx:
I stopped reading your posts after this ugly remark
(...)you are "communicating" with users here in such disgusting manner(...)
i shall not myself answer to whatever HyJavxLTD, if not paranoïa, at least complex of inferiority, might lead him to overstate and, repeating what i said, i have only used here my right to answer to personal offensive words like “angry clown” and “poor lil person”.
WOW!!!
Bruce, you just said I was saying my life was built on wiki’s, eh? YOU REALLY DID NOT READ ANYTHING DID YOU. I said EXACTLY the oppisite.
Secondly, I was being ‘sarcastic’ in the angry clown comment and it should be clear…who calls anyone a clown these days.
And its awesome you dont think a CEO should address such a question that deals with Win security and their own product running together. Maybe thats part of why companies think they can do what they do.
Still, its awesome you said I was saying everything I wasnt. It truly shows who is just typing and who is actually responding.
@ HyJaxLTD
Do not send me any ■■■!
Hi, I’m using COMODO Pro and Defense+ told I had some files to check and then it listed some files and I sent them to the Quarantine but a lot of these files are not bad and some are .exe of some programs.
I want to restore this files and don’t remove them.
How can I restore files from the Quarantine?
Thank you
You can restore these files from the quarantine by going to Antivirus/ Quarantined Files. The select the files and select restore. Please disable your AV while doing this.
Once these files are restored please upload them as false positives to:
They will send you an email with the results of their analysis. This usually only takes a few hours.
You will then also need to add these files to the exclusions list under scanner settings until you receive the email with the results of the analysis. After adding them to the exclusions list you can re-enable the AV.
If you have any more questions please ask.
edit: Sorry, this is not the right place to answer these types of questions. Please start a topic elsewhere.
I’m using comodo firewall pro as I said, my anti virus is microsoft essencials from microsoft.
How do I restore these arquives without purge them, don’t remove them. They are in quarantined files in Defense+ in comodo firewall and I clicked on a file and there’s not a option to restore and nothing writted restore.
Sorry, I missunderstood you. If these files were in your pending files then this does not mean that Comodo believed them to be malicious. They were merely in the list to be uploaded and checked.
If you don’t have Comodo AntiVirus installed then you shouldn’t have any quarantined files from Comodo. The closest that you have is blocked files in Defense+.
I’m unsure if this is what you’re talking about or not, but if you need to continue this discussion please start a new topic in Defense+/Sandbox Help as this is not the right place for these types of questions.
I tend to agree with most of what Melih says here. Using a reactive technology, by definition you are behind from the very start. Proactive technology and whitelisting good files is the way forward in my opinion, because there are simply too many malware variants to keep pace with. Just my two cents, if anyone attacks me i’ll burn their house down ;D jk.
‘Calm down Angry Clown’ is where you stopped reading. Grow up. I was being attacked for some poor lil person deciding it was completly personal. Some of you really need to go out and experience communication in the REAL world if tha comment seemed ‘ugly’. Sorry but its true. You decided it was demeaning. It was meant to lighten the mood.
Bottom Line: Unless you are Melih, stop answereing a question posted to Melih. Unless you have a partner agreement with MS od ANY sort, stop answering questions based on your wiki life. Unless you are Comodo, dont tell me how Comodo has cdesigned there suite.
YOU ARE WRONG. It IS NOT required to disable WinFW with 3rd party vendors (what is 2nd party FW anyhow, did you read that on a wiki?). The THIRD PARTY FIREWALL vendor is told when they meet the requirements of MS to be a security solution provider ‘it is recommended that all security solutions be designed around Windows basic operating framework’; this DOES include the Windows FW.
As already stated, the Windows Firewall controls more than just FW type activities. If the THIRD PARTY vendor requires the FW to be disabled THEY MUST include their own process’ to replace what is whut down ALONG with Windows FW.
mod edit: Warning - Commercial advertising URLs are strictly forbidden. Any more will result in a full permanent ban. kail
Windows native FW IS NOT required to be turned off in Avast v5(but Im not using them until they drop calls to the most comprimisable engine on a PC…ie flash). MICROSOFT THEMSLEVES RECOMMENDS that third party firewall vendors build their solution AROUND there FW…I dont care that you canty find that in Wikipedia…ask MS then come back and I will accept your apology for posting information you have decided its the way it is, not based in ANY facts.
‘Calm down Angry Clown’ is where you stopped reading. Grow up. I was being attacked for some poor lil person deciding it was completly personal. Some of you really need to go out and experience communication in the REAL world if tha comment seemed ‘ugly’. Sorry but its true. You decided it was demeaning. It was meant to lighten the mood.
Bottom Line: Unless you are Melih, stop answereing a question posted to Melih. Unless you have a partner agreement with MS od ANY sort, stop answering questions based on your wiki life. Unless you are Comodo, dont tell me how Comodo has cdesigned there suite.
YOU ARE WRONG. It IS NOT required to disable WinFW with 3rd party vendors (what is 2nd party FW anyhow, did you read that on a wiki?). The THIRD PARTY FIREWALL vendor is told when they meet the requirements of MS to be a security solution provider ‘it is recommended that all security solutions be designed around Windows basic operating framework’; this DOES include the Windows FW.
As already stated, the Windows Firewall controls more than just FW type activities. If the THIRD PARTY vendor requires the FW to be disabled THEY MUST include their own process’ to replace what is whut down ALONG with Windows FW
[at] haidivolume and luzagodom,
Which account do you want me to kill?
Multiple accounts for the same individual only cause blips on the mods radar and we’d hate to doubt you unnecessarily. 
Ewen 
[i]P.S. Decision taken out of your hands. “haidivolume” account banned. Your other account is still valid.
2nd mod edit: User later added spam URLs to signature & web-site. Removed. kail
[/i]
Multiple accounts for the same individual only cause blips on the mods radar and we'd hate to doubt you unnecessarily.
Why “unnecessarily”?
Multiposting/Multiaccounting shows what has to be thought not only of the formal presentation of the “arguments”, but of the validity of these arguments themselves.
Why would he need two accounts just to post supporting views of his own argument?
Why would he need two accounts at all?
Multiple accounts make it harder to work out who is saying what in a thread and how many “real” posters there are in a topic.
His other login is still valid and he is welcome to use it.
Ewen