How does BOClean differ from Cyberhawk?
(L) CFP
CH is a behaviour blocker. BOClean is an Anti-Trojan, with signatures and Heuristics (i think).
CH does not use signatures. It analyses the behavior of applications to determine if they’re malicious or not (behavior like changing the registry, hiding itself etc.)
Ahhhhh, gotcha. Thx Pedro. 
Wish I had known of BOClean long before last week. 
(L) Any knowledge on how BoClean compares to ‘Trojan Hunter’ from Mischel Internet Security? (:KWL)
BOClean operates in a different way from all other AV/ATs
From here:
File scanners can only detect fixed patterns and if the malware has been compressed, encrypted or modified, it cannot be detected by pattern matches since it will no longer match the pattern and will thus elude detection. BOClean watches memory, registry, and the file system waiting for malware to load up and then shuts it down before they have a chance to operate.
That said, it has one of the most extensive malware databases around, and new submissions are added within hours more often than not.
It is almost totally hands off, and it has a comparatively tiny footprint.
IMHO it is THE perfect complement to your current antivirus protection.
Heres something for thought.
AV-Comparatives did an AT test a while ago (March 2006) and from what I understand the developers of Trojan Hunter asked to be withdrawn from the test because of the results they received after the test was done.
You can read about it on the AV-Comparatives web site, just look for Anti Trojan Comparative 2006.
I would put my trust in BOClean since I have been using this program for a couple of years and the GREAT support people here will soon find out from Kevin is definitely tops.
If you had to pay for BC and TH was free I would still go with BC, thats how much I believe in Kevin and BOClean.
Some of Kevin McAleavey explanation right in this forum:
Thank you also TonyKlein, hope to hear more from you.
(CNY) also
Thanks for the input; really appreciate it. (:KWL)
Whoa there, fanclub!
I’m pleased to learn that Comodo has gobbled up (erm, “acquired the assets of”) the BOClean app,
and I’m aware that Mr. Kevin was one of the pioneers in “malware heuristics research”…
…but this is 2007 and BOClean no longer represents a singularly unique approach.
At the risk of sounding antagonistic, in fairness (considering the “misinformation” being posted to these forums by overly-enthusiastic fans) I’m compelled to ask:
Have y’all been living in a bubble?
year 2001
^------------ incluees reference to www.entercept.com which has since been acquired by McAfee
as sell as www.recourse.com which has since been acquired by Symantec
(McAfee later also gobbled up the Inspirian product www.ispirian.com )
year 2004
^------ a quick read
year 2007
buzz phrases like “heuristics” and “proactive prevention” are commonplace
across many firewall / suite / antivirus applications.
It’s reached the point (the market has matured to the point) that, in an attempt to gain brand recognition
and to claim “best-ess-ness”, most vendors have their own cutesy l’il name
(TM, ®, Patent Pretending) for the “process” being hyped / marketed:
“Proactive Behavior Blocker”
(product = Kaspersky Anti-Virus 6.0)
Norman antivirus / Firewall
“Sophos Behavioural Genotype® Protection technology”
(product = Sophos Mobile Security )
www.sophos.com
“B-HAVE (Behavioral Heuristic Analyzer in Virtual Environments)”
(product = BitDefender Antivirus Plus)
“Realtime Spyware Monitor”
(OutpostPro firewall)
Eset NOD32 Antivirus
www.eset.com
a-squared Anti-Malware
by Emsi Software GmbH
“Real-time Protection”
(product = CA Antispyware 2007)(formerly eTrust® PestPatrol® Anti-Spyware)
shop.ca.com/spyware/anti_spyware.aspx
“Active Defense Shield”
(product = Aluria Security Center)
“AVG Resident Shield”
(product = AVG Anti-Spyware)
“DeepGuard technology”
(product = F-Secure Internet Security 2007)
“OSFirewall”
(product = Checkpoint ZoneAlrem)
“VIPRE™ anti-malware" and "Active Protection”
(product = CounterSpy v2)
“TruPrevent Technologies”
(product = Panda Antivirus)
BOClean has had a fine, and long-running reputation, and Comodo should be applauded for recognizing the merit of its inclusion in their product line. It’s a shame to see well-intended (and uncorrected / unrebutted) “misinformation” here in the forums, because that will serve to undermine the collective credibility.
I can’t guess who will be the loudest Comodo evangelists, but I expect that the most effective / influential evangelists will be those people who are respected by their peers (and IT managers, and friends, family, etc) as being “knowledgeable”. Gaining market share with the “set and forget” masses will require publication of favorable results from product comparisons conducted by “knowledgeable” (erm, ‘popular’) reviewers. They sure aren’t blind to the “competition” faced by Comodo and, unfortunately, many of them remain unimpressed by the v2.4+ Comodo firewall product. Hopefully Comodo’s v3.0 firewall and the emergence of its BOClean-powered functionality will turn a few journalistic heads.
As a note here I only commented on some of your inputs… and I am not exactly an Evangelist. I have not had BOclean before. But I do know that I haven’t ever had to deal deal with a comprimised PCs when it’s present.
NONE of thoose programs is as good at BOClean to protect your computer from trojans (M)
I noticed names like NOD32, Kasperky, BitDefender, etc.
However it has been posted time and time again, Kevin has mentioned this plenty of times also…
BOClean is not meant to replace your AV but should be considered as a second line of defense within your internet security programs.
Exactly… It is part of a strong arsenal of antimalware tools (I know the filter here is going to do somethin funny with a r s e n a l…)
frazzled, you should read this