Would Comodo be able to get the samples that she failed in the self-protection test from anti-malware.ru and analyzing them and strengthen her self-defense capability? I hope CIS could achieve 100% score from that test as well. I am a huge fan of KAV which is great for them to get 100% score from that test. I just switch to CIS recently because I feel Comodo is more innovative than competitions in the security field nowadays.
I think there are no real samples. For example comodo is failing “AV Database Removing”. That is sad but not a real problem beacause D+ is there. Only WinStation Terminate Process completly disables Comodo so that is a problem. All other 4 things needs user intervention.
So basicly for me it only failed one test. For example Gdate did very good but it scored almost last. Only thing that was going on is a killed GUI. Well that is not a big problem!!
Frankly, I don’t need to look any further than http://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/
look here! even here CIS wins:D
[attachment deleted by admin]
Where can I find this test?
Another new one:
PcMag.com review of Comodo Anti Virus 5.0, though he does have Defense + installed?
Let’s get the advice from them:
Pros: already know and acknowledged
Sandbox technology can prevent valid programs from installing or running correctly. Many alarming and confusing popups. Mediocre malware detection and very poor cleanup on already-infested systems.
What do the users call “confusing popups”? Maybe they should have only simple information?
Mediocre malware detection: let’s improve CAV
Cleanup… Seems the challenge for some users. Let’s go for it.
Seems like a fair review to me.
Or at least an option to only display simple information.
Exactly. A button with (recommended) action.
Then a button (check mark) to expand the informations and telling more about it.
And give the advice to them and other writers. Looks like a lot of them here … 8)
I found some never realize that in the classical AV scheme is working formula: zero protection + percentage of detection = percentage of protection. In CIS: full protection - percentage of detection = percentage of user interaction.
Can not believe that in the past, I listened to a press review… ???
This latest pcmag review surprised be me greatly. I often don’t like reviews from this source, because I feel the tester many times lets his personal tastes come through his opinions. Not in this case.
There was one sentence that left me with a though and I know it was discussed already by other users in different threads: “If the folks at Comodo want to seriously contend that there’s no hope for a malware-infested system, that the only recourse is to wipe it and start over, then they should simply omit malware removal from the product. Including it as a feature that performs this poorly will not impress the user”
I agree with that assesment. I hope Comodo re-thinks his train of thought, and give his AV detection/cleaning component a fair bump.
Good job Comodo for scoring so high up in keeping a “clean pc, clean”
Cleaning is a step forward detection.
Detection will help a lot: reduce the user interaction and fear, allows cleaning.
comodo is starting to work cleaning abilities with the next versions. Up till now it has been about preventing infections, which it does very well.
I had the same reaction, almost like NR was thinking my thoughts after me, weird!
Good to see such a thorough testing and review. He accurately pinpoints the areas where there is still room for improvement and confirms that with a little knowledge the user is fully protected.
No av on the market can do a 100% cleanup of an infested system, even with specialist tools such as Combofix there is no guarantee of that.