+1
There are many examples of AV companies making total protection or 100% claim with no backing of their statement. They do not stand behind their products never the less their statements by giving end users a “guarantee/warranty”.
We do! We back our statement with a “warranty/guarantee”. We put our money where our mouth is and that is a HUGE improvement compare to how others market their products!
So there simply is no comparison between our commitment vs other AVs pls.
Melih
Ok Melih,
Let’s say that I’ve just recived new varian of Gpcode/Blackday via e-mail undetected by Comodo and I run that.
It encrypted/damaged all my documents and they ar unable to recover.
Is it better to:
a) Pay me up to 500$ (these money wouldn’t recover my files anyway),
b)give CIS abilities to prevent these type of attacks and protect the user.
??
of course to prevent…our AV detects Gpcode…we are always working towards putting security while maintaining usability to a level where the risk vs reward ratio is maintained.
Melih
Yes, CAV can detect current versions of Gpcode…
you know, that everyday there are 50 k new malware and 95% of them go undetected
You also know that AV is enough ONLY NOW and cannot detect new variant of Gpcode/blackday one day…
IMO it’s better to prevent now with Defense + than exposing users to risk.
and usability would be the same… autosandbox would prevent alerts, nothing would change in usability
and END USER would gain better protection
Please, take it into consideration.
The advert as shown by w-e-v says “Guaranteed to block 100% of the viruses and other malware”.
That is a different guarantee then the financial guarantee that Melih is referring to. There are two different meanings of the same word. The Meriam Webster shows four different meanings of the verb to guarantee.
The text from the advert is simply not true; no security suite can always prevent all malware. That does not mean CIS is doing a bad job though; au contraire I would say.
This is what happens when you let the Marketing people use the crayons last.
There is no such thing as 100% security.
IMO’
A guarantee doesn’t positively 100% mean it won’t break, it just means compensation is available if it does.
Example: New car guaranteed for 3 years or 100000kms, doesn’t mean it won’t have faults in this time or break down, it just means it will be repaired or some form of compensation if it does.
That is guarantee in the meaning of warranty (third description) . When a serious failure happens during that period the customer does not have to pay the repair.
But in this case Comodo states “Guaranteed to block 100% of the viruses and other malware”.
And in some cases even live pc support and 500$ wouldn’t help (vide Gpcode, blackday).
I think you have misunderstood where the Guarantee comes in.
You wont be compensated just because you got infected.
Thats not the Guarantee being offered by COMODO. Otherwise, I would download black-day, install it, and claim $500. 
They will pay if they cannot recover the PC to a working condition (meaning their protection would have failed).
Guarantee: a formal assurance that certain conditions will be fulfilled, especially that restitution will be made if a product is not of a specified quality.
What “certain conditions will be fulfilled”? Answer: BLOCK 100% viruses and malware.
The advert its clear enough, COMODO says it blocks 100% viruses and malware.
Guarantee its only to backup that advert, which again the advert its not a true statement. There is no 100% blocking. You said it.
Do you see any advert from New Cars saying:
GUARANTEED to work 100% without fails the first 3 years or 100000kms.
No such thing. The guarantee its that any expenses for reparation will be on the manufacturer.
Thats another type of guarantee. That shows that you have misunderstood what COMODO is offering.
So we talk about detection here with AV, instead of prevention?
By the way, I do honestly think COMODO its doing well at preventing most of the malware and viruses.
But to advertise 100% block, its not right. GUARANTEED TO BLOCK 100%, its even worst.
Will be better accepted, and in real life that is, to say:
GUARANTEED to provide the highest protection against traditional security software.
So we talk about detection here with AV, instead of prevention.
Exactly!
Detection and prevention are 2 different things!
Detection is obsolete method (according to Melih) and WE MUSTN’T rely on it!
Prevention is a real line of defense, not detection, because it usually fail (just see over the internet how many infection we have from users who use Deafult Allow software).
I don’t know where Comodo is going, but it’s against Comodo’s philosophy.
Yes, really.
People, and CEO who talk about “Deafult Deny”, and “AV is not enough” and that kind of stuff justifies
proactive protection FAIL with AV… sorry.
You said about usability… you know that it wouldn’t change anything.
Average users have auto sandbox enabled, they wouldn’t see any alert!
They wouldn’t “feel” this security improvment.
But they would be more secure, and Comodo would do improvment according to Melih’s statement and the newest technology. NOT against youself.
Actually I’ve never thought that Comodo would say that AV is enough?
Oh, come on
Your video :
( I don’t want to be unkind, but are they lies?..)
ProActive protection (Defense+) should be the most important part of CIS, if you really want to PREVENT threats. I really like Comodo and Melih, but what i read here…sorry.
+1
COMODO said, there is no 100% blacklisting.
And depending on that blacklisting to defend users for TODAYS Gpcode, blackday, etc… its not the right way to approach the problem. Its a good way for now, but not for the near future.
Melih, we need to hear something different from you. Dont go against your philosophy wich is strong and the best one when we talk about prevention. Forget the Guarantee by now, because itself wont stop Gpcode or blackday.
This has to be fixed ASAP and not in future releases. We trust You and we trust COMODO.
Gpcode or blackday.
The curiosity is that both trojans use the same method!
And I’m sure that these 2 trojans are only face of thousands malware in the wild with the same capabilities.
When we say about Defense + improvments we should kept in mind:
-Blacday,Gpcode - getting list of files,
-Ransomware covering all the screen,
-some logging methods which CIS doesn’t monitor.
It should read “100% protection…As long as the user clicks “block” after each and every D+ pop-up. But if the user actually thinks what he/she is downloading is legitimate and they really want it on their machine, so they click “allow”, then the guarantee is null and void.” >:-D
As long as the user clicks "block" after each and every D+ pop-up
It is not even a case. Sometimes Defense + just doesn’t react for some malicious actions.
a) GPCode and Black-Day don’t make it past Comodo, just the basic sandbox.
b) virtualization solves this
We’ll see full virtualization in 6.0 for automatic sandboxing, which will provide near perfect protection on its own. That on top of a sizable blacklist and other modules of protection is as close to perfect as you can get with a single product.
a) GPCode and Black-Day don't make it past Comodo, just the basic sandbox.
It’s not true or I didn’t understand you.
b) virtualization solves this
What’s about people who use only Defense + and don;t want to use sandbox?
And virtualiztaion won’t solve full screening problems.
And here are these 2 problems what I am talking about:
Full-screening malware → http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krEcuum8vdc
Gpcode/blackday - > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7i3mDT6Xpc
Sandbox disabled, only Defense +, Proactive configuration
the warranty applies to the full product and not limited/cut down configuration.
I disabled AV to show how Comodo would react when these files would be undetected (new variants and other malware using these methods which are undetected now).
Sandbox was disabled, but even if it has been enabled that wouldn’t change anything (sandbox only refrain D+ alerts).
So, proactive protection failed and need fix, really.
???
There’s a bit more to it than that…
The sandbox limits the system access rights of the sandboxed application.