Any settings available to make v2.4 pass all of Matousec's tests?

Online Armor Free and Outpost 2008 are tied for first place in the Matousec tests.
Is there any setting I can change in the default v2.4 configuration that will make it as leaktest proof as the two leaders?

If not, will there ever be an update to v2.4 to allow this protection level?

id also like to know this as version 3 is a nightmare to use.

+1 :-TU
not everyone can use V3. and V2’s GUI is better than V3 (:TNG)

Matousec uses for the leaktests the Firewall leaktester tests, and are conducted with IE6 as far as i remember.

The difference between Comodo 2.4 and Outpost pro/OA relies on the fact Comodo passes only 35 of the 38 FPR batch tests and 1 of the 4 wallbreak tests.

As far as wallbreak is concerned, the testing involves faking of IE: if IE is denied by CPF (for instance, i only use Firefox), wallbreak gives a firewall alert in every of the 4 tests: in this configuration, CFP 2.4 passes wallbreak.

I do not clearly understand FPR; i tried to run the all 38 tests: it is obvious they are not universal (i am not concerned by a za bypassing test), and i suppose the failures should be written to the specific leaktest folder, they actually were not.

Did someone else make these same tests?

not everyone can use V3. and V2's GUI is better than V3
I think 3.0 is a computer experts dream in that it has lots of "bells and whistles" to configure, adjust, and play with. I doubt that Comodo will keep improving 2.4, such as adding an easy import/export settings feature, password protection, being able to group rules (especially network rules), and perhaps updating it with 3.0's excellent PU definitions and help file, and imo that's too bad, as it seems to be a good SW-FW for the average user. After playing with 3.0 for a few weeks, it's definitely intimidating to the average computer user much less the people who keep "Video Professor" in their tray and who want to just load their SW-FW on boot and have it make all the decisions, and especially those who won't take the time to learn and understand network rules, much less HIPS PUs. This is probably why ZA-free is so popular. JMHO, but I think there's room for 2 Comodo FWs, if Comodo ever decides to update/upgrade 2.4, but I think they've got their hands full with 3.0 right now. Also, imo 3.0's D+ PU explanations are much better than KAV's Proactive-D but whether D+ is better than Proactive D, I don't know. I do like being able to make a one-time temporary deny decision in D+ if you're not sure, and then not having to enter the HIPS GUI to hunt down and reverse the rule if it ■■■■■■■ something up. Also as far as 2.4 GUI being better than 3.0, the only area that I think this is true is it's much easier/faster to toggle between "active connections" and "FW logs" and then to "network rules" if you need to temporarily adjust a network rule in 2.4 than in 3.0. However, the ability to group Net' rules as well as assign them your own title in 3.0 gets a :-TU :-TU imo.
Online Armor Free/Outpost Pro
I've got OA-free on an image and have played around with it for a while, and I'd have to agree with the poster that wrote, it's GUI is too Window's 95ish. As far as Outpost pro goes, I haven't tried it, but I read a lot of good things about it. It's just hard anymore to decipher between the honest user opinions and the corporate shill product plugs on the forums....and btw, for the non-computer expert, a one month free evaluation period on SW-FW/HIPS shareware, is not enough time. A paid FW/HIPS should give, at the very minimum, a 2 month evaluation period, and probably 3, if they feel they got a quality product and just trying to get their money up-front because they know their product sux and the purchasing customer will never upgrade, like some of the Video/DVD-bloatware software manufacturers.

I am not talking about improving.

I am talking about completing/finishing.

CFP v2.4 still has numerous bugs, one of the most annoying is that it often forgets its settings, possibly related to the fact that Comodo decided to let it save its rules in the registry.
Why they didn’t opt for storing it in a simple XML file which would allow more flexibility in configuration is beyond me.

CFP v2.4 IS INCOMPLETE, yet Comodo decided to move to v3.0.

So now, guess what?
Instead of one INCOMPLETE firewall, Comodo has TWO, as v3.0 is also FULL OF BUGS.

The only complete product Comodo has is BOClean, and they acquired that from another company.

At this stage I doubt that Comodo can actually even deliver a finished product on their own! (:AGY)

Ouch. that hurt. ;D