A.V. is broken, tells lies, Millions of users at risk ! !

My documents were corrupted when I created them if I lost control as A.V. updates stole 99% of the CPU without even an indication on the notification tray.
I discontinued Automatic Updates so I could get on with my life, and did Manual updates.
Often I launched the update and then it lost focus as I browsed the Internet.
When I finished browsing I saw the notification
“The virus signature database is up-to-date”

I very recently noticed that there was very little delay between launching the Manual Update and it being declared “up-to-date”.
I suspected that it was time to leave behind the old faithful Comodo 3.14 and venture into uncharted sandbox territory of version 5.
I came to the forum and found that indeed version 3.1? signatures are no longer updated.

“The virus signature database is up-to-date” is now a lie
“The local signature database is synchronised to an obsolete frozen server” would be nearer the truth.

I appreciate that Comodo protection is free of charge to me,
and Comodo are not obliged to continue support of an obsolete product.
BUT EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED that there should be zero notification outside of this forum.

I suggest that Comodo owe a “Duty of Care” to all Comodo Users who registered with an email address, and those addresses should be used to warn them that they have out of date signatures.

I urgently suggest that the data-base for version 3.?? should NOT be frozen, but knocked off-line,
and hopefully millions of CIS users who never even knew of the Comodo Forum SHOULD get a warning that the updater failed to connect.
Most of the millions probably do not use manual update, and it all happens (or fails to happen) out of sight via automatic updates, so they never even get a clue that updates suddenly take zero time.

When will version 4 and version 5 have their data-bases frozen.
Will their users suddenly be left in the lurch without warning.

So I install Comodo version 5.
Can I trust it until it warns me otherwise ?
What should I worry about most,
a foolish click on a pop-up, or Comodo moving on to version 7 and leaving me behind ?

Please note that commercial A.V. products are infinitely more dependable;
they ensure the customer is notified when protection is crippled pending license renewal.

I strongly recommend as a fundamental design principle,
that any A.V. product should include suitable mechanisms that ensure notification when :-
The supplier’s systems or the Internet are down ; and
The supplier decides to discontinue active support.

I personally have not been at much risk because I quickly recognised this new situation.
My topic tile is deliberately alarmist because I believe most Comodo users do not frequent this forum,
and next year will not realise that their automatic updates are ignoring everything that is new since October.


I think that are forums where comodo says when updates won’t support a version.


Yes, I have already seen the announcement,

BUT I only saw it because I came to the forum fearing/expecting such an announcement because of my observations.

I am protesting strongly on behalf of all the users who rarely/never come to this forum.
They are being left out in the cold and they may never know until next year when they submit a report to a malware fighting website and they get told that their credit card/banking details have been stolen by malware that will arrive December 2010 and NEVER be detected by Comodo 3.14 with its frozen data-base.


actually av or not CIS will still protect you, remember the AV in comodo is nothing more then something to reduce pop ups. It is not needed to offer full protection. But for the sake of usability it is there.

If version 3.14 is adequate with a frozen data-base,
why is Comodo still updating for version 4.xx and 5.xx ? ! !

I accept that the Firewall keeps out stuff I do not permit (unless I get fooled.)

I accept that Defense+ will put a stop to behavior I do not permit (unless …

BUT C.I.S. claims the virtue of multi-layered defense,
which I interpret as meaning that more than one mechanism must have a defect or be given a foolish “allow” before anything really bad happens.
I consider an out of date signature database to be a chink in the Armour,
and the longer naive users continue trusting an A.V. that is ignorant of what is developing “in the wild”,
the more exposed they are.

For now I am satisfied that the chink is not yet a chasm, and I may “safely” stick with 3.14 until I have chosen whether or not to include the Sandbox option of version 5.


3v is abit old if you ask me and of what I understand CIS 5 is to 200% - 300% more secure than 3v/4v

But you are right that comodo should tell it’s users to download the latest version of CIS due to no support/no updates for v3.


Unfortunately, no…

I had an experience recently where CIS (Version 5) stopped automatically updating the virus database for no apparent reason. I had absolutely no indication from CIS that updates were failing until the Windows Security Center warned me that my AV may be out of date.

So CIS was aware that the updates weren’t happening as it reported as much to the WSC. But it was keeping that fact quiet to me, the user.

This problem existed for a week until (Coincidentally? You decide…) a bug report I made on the issue was moved to the Format Verified bug reports list. (Which as I understand it, the developers don’t take a bug report seriously until it makes this list)

It doesn’t instill trust that my AV doesn’t warn me of failing updates.

Alan, I agree with you. Any signature-based antivirus without updates is next to useless, perhaps even a liability because it instills a false sense of security (heck, security isn’t perfect even with updates). The CAV 3 database update server should be taken offline or otherwise rigged to provoke deliberate error messages whenever CAV 3 tries to update. This would be the most responsible thing for Comodo to do. If people want to continue using CFW 3 that’s okay, but it should be clear that CAV 3 is done. Maybe people using CFW 3 alone should remove CAV 3 and install a different AV.

I too disabled the automatic database updates in CAV 3 due to sluggish system performance during updates. However, I am now using CAV 5 with automatic database updates turned on, and I don’t notice performance issues during updates. You should give it a try.

Unfortunately, like HeffeD wrote, it seems there might still be a few bugs in the CAV 5 updater. I think I had a similar issue, but in my case I found out about it much sooner because, just for testing, I turned on the “Show balloon messages” option–this pops up a balloon message over the system tray before and after every update attempt. Details in this thread: https://forums.comodo.com/antivirus-help-cis/cav-failing-to-update-solved-t64954.0.html
The really bad part is that the CAV status indicated the database was up-to-date, except intermittently it would be out-of-date and Windows Security Center would prompt about it too. Anyways, I figured out what the problem was, and hopefully Comodo fixes it by adding some simple sanity checks and diagnostics.

Thanks for support.

Poll added.
Please pile on the pressure

@longtime thanks for suggestion of balloon messages.


Yes, I never thought to turn on the balloon messages when I was having the trouble. :-[

Even though there are some apparent quirks with the av updater. As far as I can tell they luckily seem to happen with a small minority of users.

In general the av update with v5 is much more well behaved, the overall performance is better and it less crash prone while scanning.

Well, the quirks actually affect every single user…

As mentioned, the updates fail silently. And even more surprising, CIS will tell you it is up to date even though the database was never updated! :o

Unless the user has enabled balloon messages, (default setting is disabled) or likes to view their AV event logs, (and knows what the cryptic codes mean) you’re not going to know you aren’t connecting to the servers until it’s gone long enough that Windows Security Center lets you know something is amiss.

Who knows, perhaps shorter duration server hiccups are commonplace? No one could know this but Comodo. Maybe this is why updates fail silently? Because otherwise, lack of user notification that an update has failed seems like a glaring oversight in the design of a security application. :-\

Like the automatic transmission. Just for usability. I mean, nobody would ever actually want to drive their car allowing it to make it’s own gearshift decisions, would they?

This is a serious issue- not only with COMODO- I didn’t know exactly what was happening with my AV, until I was researching for a NEW provider and found your comments here- which made a light bulb go off.

I venture to say a vast majority of users never set eyes on these bulletin boards, or re-visit the website after the initial download. Once they click auto-update, or receive the update successful message- they ask no more questions- and expect NO LIES. Seems to me there is an implicit fiduciary agreement, although not contractual and everyone certainly understands the product is FREE.

However- you guys are the IT wizzards- how difficult (and we all know inexpensive) would it be to send an e-mail blast to all registered users of versions no longer being supported - providing a WARNING this version is no longer supported and you are at RISK. And if the server is contacted for an unsupported version up date- send an ERROR message with the same warning- redirecting them to the most current version download site.

!ot! The only question I have is- WHY would this situation be so universally UNaddressed? There must be something ($$) in it for someone…

If it happens it’s a problem but I don’t think it is “universally UNaddressed”.

E.g. Anyone who updates PC Tools AV v.6 will be told they have the latest definitions, which is true. Unfortunately, the latest defs were produced months ago when support for that version ceased. >:(

On the other hand, some Avast 4.X users complain when the are told to upgrade because support for their current version will cease sometime in the future.