Challenge to Symantec from Comodo CEO!

I read what Symantec have said about Free Anti Virus products. This kind of misinformation is just unacceptable from companies like Symantec! Enough is Enough…You can’t mislead end users with blatant lies like this!

If Symantec truly believes what they preach to the media then they will have no problem taking this challenge:

To Symantec: Comodo openly challenges you to an independent test to see which product can protect users better. A $$$ Norton product or totally Free Comodo!

Just come and let us know, PM me, Email me, whatever method you want whenever you want. Our respective companies will choose a mutually agreeable independent testing organisation to test which product can “Protect” the end user better.

Eagerly awaiting your answer.


PS: Our forums users: I would appreciate if you alerted Symantec to this post just in case they “miss” it :wink: This way they can’t claim they never received the challange :wink:

Edit ****************************
22 September 2010

The misinformation continues…

Here is what Symantec said in USA Today, (2010-09-22) (thats, today )

“Freeware vendors have created a false perception that free, basic security is enough to protect you from today’s online threats,” says Janice Chaffin, president of Symantec’s consumer business unit. “The reality is, free is not enough. It’s like wearing a light windbreaker in a snowstorm.”

Symantec, when will you stop scare mongering end users to make them pay money to you? This strategy you follow is no different than what FAKE AV products do. They too scare the users to get them fork out, and you do that too! Shame on you!

This is not the first time we are hearing this type of scare mongering from Symantec, so I can only assume this is the company policy being executed by its employees!


Way to go Melih! :stuck_out_tongue:

Best of luck to…
Good initiative!
Keep up the good work!
Mats H

Personally I think both products would do well, but as long as both companies can agree on what

means then Comodo should come out on top by a small margin.

Truthfully I believe that Norton 2011 is a very good product and so is CIS 2011. I think they’ll both do great, but Comodo will be slightly better.

Hopefully we’ll get to find out. :wink:

Very nice move Melih, it sickens me to think such a company would use this kind of tactic in order to justify their charging $$$/£££ to users in order to keep the scare tactics in motion. Please feel free to sticky/create a post where we can spread the word via facebook (they got to have a FB fan page right?). It maybe classed as flaming on their space but will bring alot of attention, thus they cannot deny your challenge.

To be honest, due to my love of Comodo, I hope you kick their arse, same goes for Verisign, but we all know you are doing that, especially when some of their prize talent are coming over to you guys.

Regardless of which area of the business we focus on, it all boils down to one thing which Comodo represents, and that is “HONESTY!!”

here is a link to my blog .



Good idea, but they will ignore it.

do they have a choice :wink:


If you want to show what comodo is able to do, you have the oportunity in AVComparatives, I still don’t know what is Comodo waiting for.

What about the super new feature of Comodo that will increase the detections? :wink: until when are you going to keep the secret?

lol…AV comparitives does NOT measure “protection”…it measures “detection” (this issue has been re-hashed many, MANY, times in the forum and answers have been given). Symantec is talking about “protection” not “detection”. So lets stick to the topic. (FYI, you can watch this video to understand the difference between “detection” vs “protection” and how Comodo uses Detection technology. Bottom line is, What Comodo doesn’t detect, Comodo still “protects” you from! Can’t say the same thing about technologies that relies on “detection” as the only layer. What will happen to a malware that Norton doesn’t detect on your PC?

If Symantec believes the statement they make that Free AVs don’t “protect” as well as $$$ norton ones, then lets see! Lets get an independent testing organisation to test the “protection” aspect of the products.


The Dynamic test of AVC is not just a detection measurement.
They are talking about FREE AV’s, with the same argument I can say Norton is talking about Free AV’s, and Comodo is a full suite.
Since you have the option to install only Comodo AV is quite clear that Norton AV will beat Comodo AV.
In the other hand Comodo IS will beat to Norton IS.

I think that Comodo have more important things to do like fix all the problems with the DNS, the block abilty was release yesterday and I only read complains in the topic:

And as I said they will ignore this, they dont have nothing to win with this.

More than happy to install Comodo AV only vs Norton AV and see which one “protects” you better :wink:

Again, I do hope you appreciate the difference that “automatic Sandboxing” makes, which is available in our AV also.

So, again, more than happy to test just Comodo AV vs Norton AV if you want :wink: or CIS vs NIS…

Here is a question for you lordraiden, what will Norton AV do with the malware it doesn’t detect? Can you pls let us know :wink:

We know Comodo AV will sandbox any unknown malware that it doesn’t detect!


I dont know what are you trying deviating what we are discussing. I never said that Norton will protect better than CIS.

If you want to see CAV vs Norton AV, youtube is plenty of videos. Every file that goes to the sandbox a Norton detects is a fail if you want to compare just the AV.

are you saying that if a malware goes into sandbox it can infect the system and the user is not “protected” as a result?


Best Luck Melih,
This is beautiful step to put open challenge, let norton respond :slight_smile: i m 100% sure Comodo is better than norton (otherwise you would not make such open challenge ;)). :-TU :-TU :-TU

Norton Where are You
Please Respond

Read it again

.... Every file that goes to the sandbox a Norton detects is a fail[u][b] if you want to compare just the AV[/b][/u].

why is it a fail if there is no infection?

ps: just for clarification when i refer to Norton I refer to them as full product (no matter what they have inside from simple detection to sonar, insight etc).

I put it in Symantec Forum:

Goodluck Melih! :-TU