CIS 5.8 Beta - 98.54% detection

[Melih]

@lordraiden post:20

I didn’t insult you, if you say something that is not true, say that is a lie, is a fact. Also if you keep avoiding the question, makes it more obvious.

You said answering in a beta forum to the recent changes in CIS 5.8 that the detection has been improved drastically.
https://forums.comodo.com/beta-corner-cis/comodo-internet-security-582066942075-beta-released-t76203.0.html;msg546195#msg546195

There is nothing in the changelog about that, so egemen does no know, or there is no improvement in CAV.

Because you don’t know doesn’t make my statement a lie.
It just means you don’t know.

I would appreciate it if you complied with the rules and do not insult others. Egemen does not run the AV labs, Igor does.

thank you

Melih

[lordraiden]

@Melih post:21

Because you don’t know doesn’t make my statement a lie.
It just means you don’t know.

I would appreciate it if you complied with the rules and do not insult others. Egemen does not run the AV labs, Igor does.

thank you

Melih

Insult others? who do I insulted?

Yes I do know, you said that the AV detection was drastically improved in the new beta… but there is no change in CAV related with detections in 5.8

Rules? so I can say something without any proof or detail and is allowed in this forum? I thought this was called trolling.

If you were just doing your propaganda round in the forums, you can simply admit it, I don’t see any problem.

PD: I almost forgot, Thanks for avoiding a so simple question again and again that will make all this conversation absurd, at least it makes the forum more funny. ;D

[dave1234]

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.

Remember do not wear blinkers and think Detection is what counts. I would rather have an av that detects say 99% than 99.9% but has other proven security, Hips and sandboxes ect, to stop malware getting past in the first place. That set up has to be more preferable in my opinion provided the alerts are answered properly. The higher detecting av, which because of the zero day thing maybe reling solely on Signatures, Heuristics and possibly a behavior blocker…a matter of time before malware slips by under that set up.

Just a point of view

Regards
Dave1234.

[Melih]

@lordraiden post:22

Insult others? who do I insulted?

Yes I do know, you said that the AV detection was drastically improved in the new beta… but there is no change in CAV related with detections in 5.8

Rules? so I can say something without any proof or detail and is allowed in this forum? I thought this was called trolling.

If you were just doing your propaganda round in the forums, you can simply admit it, I don’t see any problem.

PD: I almost forgot, Thanks for avoiding a so simple question again and again that will make all this conversation absurd, at least it makes the forum more funny. ;D

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.

[Melih]

@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.

Remember do not wear blinkers and think Detection is what counts. I would rather have an av that detects say 99% than 99.9% but has other proven security, Hips and sandboxes ect, to stop malware getting past in the first place. That set up has to be more preferable in my opinion provided the alerts are answered properly. The higher detecting av, which because of the zero day thing maybe reling solely on Signatures, Heuristics and possibly a behavior blocker…a matter of time before malware slips by under that set up.

Just a point of view

Regards
Dave1234.

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

[Citizen_K]

@morphiusz post:17

LOL.
It’s probably just better performance and hard-work on an AV lab side.

@lordraiden post:22

Insult others? who do I insulted?

By implication,egemen, according to Melih’s post.

Yes I do know, you said that the AV detection was drastically improved in the new beta... but there is no change in CAV related with detections in 5.8

Although enhancements on Comodo's site are technically not a direct property of CIS it does influence the performance of the product. To call that a lie is taking things to another place; that of trolls.

Since you are speaking about lies I would like to know what other lies you have not discussed yet.

Stop trolling, count to ten and breathe out before posting. This is just one of your periodic bad hair days.

Rules? so I can say something without any proof or detail and is allowed in this forum? I thought this was called trolling. If you were just doing your propaganda round in the forums, you can simply admit it, I don't see any problem.

Stop insulting and flaming.

[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?