The new CSC (public release) is not getting registered under Defense±Computer Security Policy, whereas it is able to do all its functions properly!
In my machine Comodo is a ‘trusted vendor’… so for digitally signed comodo products, may be it is okay for defense+ not to show any alerts… But, shouldn’t it be shown in ‘computer security policy’? I have performed all the three functions… privacy, registry and clean my disk… without any alerts. Defense+ is in ‘safe mode’ and I don’t think it is ‘whilelisted’ yet in CIS but though it could be digitally signed by Comodo.
Is this behaviour observed in other computer / CIS?
XP SP2, CIS is the only realtime security application.
it seems CSC couldn’t be in that “computer security policy” thing, as it could be a verifiubility if CSC could change the policy for itself; plus Comodo couldn’t release a new predefined policy just for everytime it updated one if it’s programs. I thinks Comodo made the right choises.
Funny stories lately.
First people complain that CIS is asking to much, now they’re reporting that it says not enough
Just to let you know, you’re safe. It’s in the safe database and so automaticly learned I guess
eXPerience, I was not complaining at all… I was just pointing out a curious thing, without any worry… as it is a COMODO product and also as this was downloaded and run by myself. I am not referring to pop ups at all. I was just drawing the attention of developers to just look whether it is possible for an .exe file do its work in the computer, without being interferred or allowed by Defense+.
AFAIK, for all my executables, I have an entry in Defense+ allowing it to execute, being a safe program… sometimes it being a whitelisted program or sometimes because I tell defense+ that it is a safe program…
Since it is digitally signed… (Andrei Cuibotaru confirmed this) defense+ knows it is safe and allowed it to execute… thats okay… but I thought defense+ would create a ‘Custom’ rule for that application… i.e. for CPC, CRC & CDC in ‘Computer Security Policy’
I repeat this is not a complaint… but something which I pointed to ensure that if it is a Defense+ bug… it could be exploited… if it is not… as Defense+ is sure of its functioning… so it wasn’t shown… then I am also fine …
eXPerience, I was not complaining at all...
I was just joking around, please don't take this like a complain ;)
I was just drawing the attention of developers to just look whether it is possible for an .exe file do its work in the computer, without being interferred or allowed by Defense+.
AFAIK, if it's not asked for some reason. For example it's in the whitelist, well then it will be made a 'safe application' automaticly --> it can run how it wants
Somebody correct me if I’m wrong
‘Comodo safe’ applications which are given access by CIS is normally added in ‘Computer Security Policy’ of Defense+ as ‘Custom’. But, in this case, it was not added. Any way, EXPerience, I just wanted to confirm whether this is ‘typical’ to my CIS or whether others are also observing this… i.e. CRC/CDC/CPC not getting registered.
Okay… you can now close the tread please…
You can close it yourself also you know.
But as your question is not yet being answered I would leave it open for now. I never actually looked at it, so I can’t really tell if it’s on my computer also. I’ll see if I can tell you later.
Anyway, I think it has something to do with the certificates. Perhaps they don’t get logged into CSP
CSC is a master exe file in this case. It calls other exe files so if you create a rule for CSC under D+ it will still pop up a message when cleaning the disk for example because it is other exe file that perform the cleaning. Same for reg cleaning and all the other stuff.
Indeed, but I think that’s the problem no ? that he aint getting those pop-ups
Okay… CIS 3.8 registers it in Defense+ so I shall lock this topic now… Thanks.