CIS 5.8 Beta - 98.54% detection

[Citizen_K]

@dave1234 post:23

To a degree i agree with Lordraiden in that, until Cavs is tested By the likes of Av Comparitives, Then Cavs will not be taken seriously by some.Some regard Av- Comparitives as the holy Grail of testers i think. Having said all that, lets wait for version 6 and hopefully a step up again in detection will satisfy the doubters.

Lordraiden is one of the strong proponents of getting tested by AV Comparitives or alikes. That does not justify starting a riot by saying Melih is spreading lies.

[dave1234]

I do not agree and will never condone with insulting others period, whoever the insulter may be. I agree that in my opinion The Av should at some point be tested By Av- Comparitives, and i stand to be corrected that months ago i saw a post or two somewhere that Cavs would be tested as a single app. If the previous is true then bring it on… and lets see.

Regards

[Melih]

@dave1234 post:28

I do not agree and will never condone with insulting others period, whoever the insulter may be. I agree that in my opinion The Av should at some point be tested By Av- Comparitives, and i stand to be corrected that months ago i saw a post or two somewhere that Cavs would be tested as a single app. If the previous is true then bring it on… and lets see.

Regards

So you disagree with Lordaidan’s statement about a “lie” because he has zero proof?

[dave1234]

Hi Melih. Yes i disagree, is the answer to your question.

Regards
Dave1234.

[siketa]

I will say only one word: Valkyrie

[lordraiden]

@Melih post:29

So you disagree with Lordaidan’s statement about a “lie” because he has zero proof?

Thanks for lying again I didn’t ask for a proof, I was just asking for a little explanation (not a proof) of what has been improved in CAV 5.8 and then you couldn’t answer, not even that, so I said it was a lie, and I wonder why and you keep avoiding the question whit a so simple answer.

@Melih post:24

I said CAV improved.
You said its a lie…
prove it…
Until you can, you can’t call it a lie.
Calling it a lie without proof is an insult.

You are so funny and this is the best definition of a troll. When you say something you have to prove it, explain it… not me.

I’m going to use the same tactic that you are using here

CIS is made by hackers that want to steal your passwords and get the money from your bank accounts, and Melih works for Russia secret service.

Now you can’t not say that I’m lying, you have to proof it first ;D

Maybe I can start a blog to talk about this, the best of all is that according to your way of thinking it will be TRUE ;D

@Melih post:25

so you agree with insulting others? Calling other peoples statemetns a lie without any proof?

Why do say others? do you have problems with your identity?
For now without any detail from your side is still I lie or something that is not true if this sounds better for your, if you prove it I will apology.

You know, something bad is something bad even if you don’t like it.

By the way, it’s obvious that you have allow this

@lordraiden post:96

Could you answer to this?
https://forums.comodo.com/beta-corner-cis/comodo-internet-security-582066942075-beta-released-t76203.0.html;msg546199#msg546199

Or can we assume that there is no improvement in the detections since there is nothing in the changelog and you have invented it?

Still no answer…

[HeffeD]

You might want to re-think your posting strategy here lordraiden, as you’re treading on dangerous ground. :P0l

Calling someone a liar is a pretty serious accusation, and not something that will be tolerated on these forums. There is nothing wrong with asking for clarification on something, but assuming a statement is a lie because of the lack of clarification is a huge conclusion to jump to…

[lordraiden]

@HeffeD post:33

You might want to re-think your posting strategy here lordraiden, as you’re treading on dangerous ground. :P0l

Calling someone a liar is a pretty serious accusation, and not something that will be tolerated on these forums. There is nothing wrong with asking for clarification on something, but assuming a statement is a lie because of the lack of clarification is a huge conclusion to jump to…

Ok, sorry I shouldn’t have said that it was a lie.

But still nobody should use CIS because of this

CIS is made by hackers that want to steal your passwords and get the money from your bank accounts, and Melih works for Russia secret service.

This is allowed right? I will bring the proofs soon.

;D

[Melih]

@lordraiden post:34

Ok, sorry I shouldn’t have said that it was a lie.

But still nobody should use CIS because of this

CIS is made by hackers that want to steal your passwords and get the money from your bank accounts, and Melih works for Russia secret service.

This is allowed right? I will bring the proofs soon.

;D

pls edit your original post where there was an insult, thank you…
I appreciate your understanding.
thanks
Melih

[lordraiden]

@Melih post:35

pls edit your original post where there was an insult, thank you…
I appreciate your understanding.
thanks
Melih

Done.

I have been told that CAV has decrease the detection capabilities of malware drastically in the latest CIS 5.8 beta

[Melih]

@lordraiden post:36

Done.

I have been told that CAV has decrease the detection capabilities of malware drastically in the latest CIS 5.8 beta

Thank you.

[lordraiden]

@Melih post:37

Thank you.

Your are welcome, and sorry for this “mess”.

[D_Bone]

I may be late to this party, but why doesn’t Comodo submit itself to the major testing companies? I’m not really looking for politics, or a fluff answer, just the real reason? Comodo seems to be a very good piece of software, and I as a user, would think that Comodo would want to beat their chest and scream “We are the best” by scoring well in the widely accepted AV tests. By not entering the tests, it makes Comodo seem like they are hiding something? I use CAV by the way.

So, what’s the real reason?

[Citizen_K]

Detection is not Prevention/Protection?

[D_Bone]

@EricJH post:40

Detection is not Prevention/Protection?

Was that to me?

[Citizen_K]

@D Bone post:41

Was that to me?

I was answering you. I should have used quotes to clarify that.

The way I see it. Comodo AV is relatively young. The protection that CIS offers exceeds what any AV can offer. Just give the detection rate time to mature some more before it hits the limelight of detection rates based tests and matching machismo (my ~snip~ is bigger than yours … ).

I started using the AV with CIS v3.5 because the suite was light; even lighter then CFP with Avira (I was running Vista on older hardware; so every bit of system load mattered). Even though the detection rate was below average back then I never got infected. That experience shows me prevention is more important than detection.

[lordraiden]

@EricJH post:42

I was answering you. I should have used quotes to clarify that.

The way I see it. Comodo AV is relatively young. The protection that CIS offers exceeds what any AV can offer. Just give the detection rate time to mature some more before it hits the limelight of detection rates based tests and matching machismo (my ~snip~ is bigger than yours … ).

I started using the AV with CIS v3.5 because the suite was light; even lighter then CFP with Avira (I was running Vista on older hardware; so every bit of system load mattered). Even though the detection rate was below average back then I never got infected. That experience shows me prevention is more important than detection.

Relatively young? bad excuse, another?

@EricJH post:42

The protection that CIS offers exceeds what any AV can offer

You are comparing apples and oranges… why do you avoid to compare the AV’s? relatively young? xD

So what?
There are many Prevention/Protection tests, and CIS is usually bypassed by malware with false certificates, the actuall 5.5 CIS can also be bypassed due to some bugs, and there always will be bugs.
https://forums.comodo.com/av-false-positivenegative-detection-reporting/report-trusted-and-whitelisted-malwares-here-dont-attach-live-malware-t67172.0.html

[webbie146]

Great that Comodo AV did good in this test. I have done test with the AV module myself and have always considered the detection to be very high

@ lordraiden - How do you even know that there are no changes/improvements being made. In the end you are just a member on this forum. You can’t know what is going on behind the scene’s. Not all small details/improvements are being noted in the change-log. Also Melih already stated that the AV engine is fine, and does not need major changes. Because of that most improvements are being made in creating generic sigs, introducing services like valkerie, and decreasing the size of the AV database.

Keep up the good work Comodo :-TU

[Boris_3]

• 100

[Melih]

@D Bone post:39

I may be late to this party, but why doesn’t Comodo submit itself to the major testing companies? I’m not really looking for politics, or a fluff answer, just the real reason? Comodo seems to be a very good piece of software, and I as a user, would think that Comodo would want to beat their chest and scream “We are the best” by scoring well in the widely accepted AV tests. By not entering the tests, it makes Comodo seem like they are hiding something? I use CAV by the way.

So, what’s the real reason?

I have said it many times before in this forum.

CIS is built to protect. There are new ways to protect the users. These testing organisations don’t have the ability to test that (they readily admit it and say it consumes too much of their time to test something like CIS).

so, what difference extra 1-2% it detects more or less compared to others? how will that effect the user? Well It won’t, because of “patent pending” “Automatic Sandboxing”, users will be protected from unknown malware because it will automatically be sandboxed. Thats a new kind of protection, we don’t need to detect to protect.

The only value of these old method of testing is for marketing purposes only. Marketing aspects are the only value to Comodo to be honest.

And there are quite few tests done by respectable organisations and you can find the results in this forum (there is a topic about that), you can also find real world tests, by real people done against real malware which is the real deal and most respectable one imo.

Melih