CFP should have a Sandbox that supports virtualization

[uh1]

@salmonela post:20

engine is weak if you ask me

Certainly it’s a matter of time. Just look at proactive engine, obviously it is the best already.

[axl]

@aigle post:15

1- From all in one, i don,t mean a security suite. I mean all type of application control with basic FireWall finction.

Means to say:

Calssical HIPS
Behave vblocker
Sandbox
Inbound and OutBound FireWall

That,s ALL for me. I don,t actually mean to add a scanner, real time signature based monitor, parental control, antipsam etc- not a Suite.

Here we see the seeds of “feature creep”.
You don’t want a scanner, real time signature based monitor, parental control, antipsam etc. but you do want:
Calssical HIPS
Behave vblocker
Sandbox
Inbound and OutBound FireWall

What you want, aside from your last request, is not part of the classical definition of a firewall.

So, how do we satisfy you, and someone else who thinks a firewall should behave differently?
Give them both!

Kitchen Sink mentality: It might seem like a good idea at the time, but history proves that this tactic does not win in the long term.

@aigle post:15

2- If u just insist on a plain FireWall, have a look on definition of a firewall first. In that case, CFP is already a big bloatware.

If I could give this more than +1 I would; alas, I am only one! (:SAD)

[aigle]

@axl post:22

Here we see the seeds of “feature creep”.
You don’t want a scanner, real time signature based monitor, parental control, antipsam etc. but you do want:
Calssical HIPS
Behave vblocker
Sandbox
Inbound and OutBound FireWall
…

Hi, no use of argument with u as I guess from ur posts.

As Melish said they will keep it modular. That must be enough, u can install watever u want.

[axl]

@aigle post:16

Hi, thanks. This modular approach is very nice. So anyone can install just what he wants. Very good approach indeed.

This would have been a “very good approach indeed” if Comodo shielded the user by:
Presenting the CFP v3 installer with the mandated option of “Firewall” and a checkbox for the option of Defense+.
Now THAT would help maintain the illusion of modularity.
Cut-and-Paste is not an option, but one wonders if a selective compilation mechanism could have been beneficial.

[axl]

@Swim post:18

According to Kaspersky statistics…

Who is this, Kaspersky? ???

[axl]

@salmonela post:19

Ok, but how to know who should come in and get out(with what informations) if you don’t know its behavior…
For now we can control access to specially protected areas (reg., files and folders) I think further improvement should be added with distinction and recognition of who and with what intention(command line) is permitted to read, write, change or delete on strategic places on the host.

The door guy is concerned about THE DOOR…
He is a big ugly guy that makes people nervous.
I wouldn’t want a big ugly guy INSIDE my club making my GUESTS nervous, stopping them for random metal detector scans.
A program that is watching the actions of every program even though you know everything is already safe is just getting in the way.
Of course, I never said that this is best for all cases; I just wanted to point out that there is a sizeable market share who think otherwise, considering the results of this poll.

[axl]

@aigle post:23

Hi, no use of argument with u as I guess from ur posts.

Don’t forget the results of your own poll. 88)

[uh1]

Who is this, Kaspersky?

F-Secure, Trend Micro, ZoneAlarm, Bluecoat, Juniper Networks, Sybari (now acquired by Microsoft), Netintelligence, and many others licensed A/V engine developed in lab of Eugene Kaspersky.

[salmonela]

@axl post:26

The door guy is concerned about THE DOOR…
He is a big ugly guy that makes people nervous.
I wouldn’t want a big ugly guy INSIDE my club making my GUESTS nervous, stopping them for random metal detector scans.
A program that is watching the actions of every program even though you know everything is already safe is just getting in the way.
Of course, I never said that this is best for all cases; I just wanted to point out that there is a sizeable market share who think otherwise, considering the results of this poll.

http://

http://

http://

I guess your guests doesn’t have invitations, I don’t know what else should be added to your guests feel more comfortable, our doorman is robust and big but yet it is very flexible and pleasant

[attachment deleted by admin]

[aigle]

@axl post:27

Don’t forget the results of your own poll. 88)

Sure I will not. Not a matter of life n death. We do have a lot of choices. U know I just posted this idea because i really think it,s a good idea. I was inspired from EQS sandbox( EQS v 4 beta).

Personally I am using GW along with CFP without issues and I do think it,s mature enough to be used on XP as long as I am using XP. Not sure about Vista or next windows.

I am not using any other security software on my system at the moment. No scanner even.