I don’t need to understand ever function of what a program is doing to use it just like I don’t have to understand how a car works to drive one.
COMODO will have to make a decision either to have a interface that the geeks understand and will most likely use. Or one the rest of us that don’t program for a living can setup and pretty much leave alone unless something major happens. Because the interface you geeks want I couldn’t understand in a hundred years. And wouldn’t use either.
Being a ‘geek’ does not confine one to the “digital universe” and as you’ve suggested, is not typically used in a disparaging way.
Since the advent of Windows and graphical UI's I have chosen to go just so far into the details behind what's going on behind the scenes and have decided that like MJR, I don't need to know what safe things are doing so I couldn't care less. I just want the bad stuff either detected or prevented from doing harm and I feel that CIS6, even in it's completely default state, does that job extremely well while staying out of the faces of people who don't want to be bothered with the details.
As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, it’s great that CIS now provides the ability to be installed an forgotten, so that people like you can spend there online time without being concerned about the configuration of their security application, however, there are those who wish to go beyond the defaults and this is where CIS 6 is failing. Neither type of user is wrong and neither is right, it’s simply about choice.
Some people are saying that unless you take control of CIS and have access to all the settings, enable HIPS, make rules for everything, etc., it is a foregone conclusion that you will get infected and/or hacked. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
Just as you have your opinion, they have theirs. One opinion does not invalidate the other.
As I have said, I have been on line for 13 years now, with and without CIS, and have NEVER been infected, hacked, or had to reformat a hard drive and start from scratch due to any kind of malware. I would have gotten infected at least a dozen times however, if not for the presence of an AV. Starting with McAfee, then Norton, then Comodo, then Avast, and now back to Comodo'. The basic combination of a good AV and the default Windows Firewall is sufficient for home users 99.999% of the time, especially if the computer is behind a router.
I’ve been using online services, in one form or another, since the mid 1980s, and I’ve never used real-time antivirus, HIPS or Behaviour Blockers. I’ve also never had any malware or any other ‘mysterious issues’. However, I’ve always configured my firewall the way I want it. You say people should have AV and firewall, I disagree. More opinions.
I also use messengers, social interaction apps, online games, Java apps, bit torrent clients, flash content, UPnP, Windows Autorun, etc. In other words, the full range of the computing experience. I refuse to let the pond ■■■■ dictate what I do on my machines or make it harder to do so. So far it has worked and if I ever do get infected and have to reinstall everything as a result, big deal. I still would not change my approach.
I’m not quite sure who you’re referring to when you say “pond ■■■■”? I hope it’s not those who simply do things differently.
Outgoing filtering in a firewall is something that is not necessary 99.99% of the time and that's why Microsoft has never enabled it by default in the Windows firewall. The only time you would really need it is if you are already infected by malware that attempts to retrieve more of the same. In other words, after the cow is already out of the barn. Comodo would most likely prevent the malware from ever becoming entrenched to that level but you can leave the firewall in Safe Mode and enable the firewall alerts and only see them for unknown things if you want to feel better protected.
Once again, it’s your opinion. The Windows firewall argument is as old as the hills and has be re-enacted on a multitude of forums across the Internet. Just because Microsoft don’t enable outbound filtering by default, doesn’t make it right.
At the end of the day, there’s more than one way of doing things. I’m happy you’ve now got something you can use, without the difficulty, you experienced, with the previous releases. All they [Comodo] have to do now, is find a way of catering for those, like me, who wish to use the product more interactively but can’t/won’t because it’s not suitable.
So you keep saying. Maybe you should hire a chauffeur…
COMODO will have to make a decision either to have a interface that the geeks understand and will most likely use. Or one the rest of us that don't program for a living can setup and pretty much leave alone unless something major happens. Because the interface you geeks want I couldn't understand in a hundred years. And wouldn't use either.
Or maybe, they could simply add back the parts they’ve taken away and make it more usable for the more intrepid users. Personally, I can’t see why doing this will have any affect on users who don’t want to understand the product.
This sums up your misconception.
You dont need an interface. So you should get a button that replaces it with something.
Not comodo needs an interface that you dont want to use.
Common sense is to have a healthy idea about how things work surround you.
I use an antivirus to know when i handle a virus.
I have a firewall for cases when something wants to enter the internet. Especially if the detection fails. Treat as ~outgoing, or block.
Too geek?
I got defense+ with that firewall. So, why not use it.
Treat as game (i had to made the rule, questions why) or you can treat as trusted when you know your file. Once.
Or block.
Too geek?
Your demand is created by marketing.
My approach is created by reasonable security with no impact.
“They” have to sell each year a license. So guess what?
“The new version is NOW
faster
more secure
pony automatic
silent
eeny weeny
!”
My security should take as less resources as possible and should not include internet actions.
Thats why i use hips.
To calmly reduce the antivirus to the basic.
Its not smart to have no control over outgoing traffic (means about ~outgoing or block). Of course windows does not implement a two way firewall. Because people like you would fill the phone lines.
If you are ok to bite the apple if the trojan phones, go ahead. But you should not be the head.
Of course not. I was referring to the malware creators.
I've been using online services, in one form or another, since the mid 1980s, and I've never used real-time antivirus, HIPS or Behaviour Blockers. I've also never had any malware or any other 'mysterious issues'. However, I've always configured my firewall the way I want it. You say people should have AV and firewall, I disagree. More opinions.No, not opinion but established fact as far as the majority of Home users are concerned. They don't know what to avoid or how to configure things like you have. You are far from being one of the "normal" users.
My approach is created by reasonable security with no impact.You keep saying that HIPS has no impact and that obviously is not true. It has a huge impact on convenience and usability in it's classic implementation. It is not "user-friendly" at all.
You did it wrong. And you will not get it.
I used comodo when it has <30 mb installer or something. It used very few cpu time. AND i could use it to reduce the antivirus to simply scan new entries. I can even exclude game folders from scans (i set my antivirus to exclude all but writing in some cases).
I have the lowest resource usage for the most possible protection. Thats the point.
Your “version” hooks while being far less secure than mine. You have to solve problems with “does it run, why not, whats that trojan doing, did it sent?”
Here all is simple like switching on the light. No exceptions. Do it once, and you know how to.
Now, my calculation says about my attempt:
Loads of benefit and low impact.
You cant see it.
Like you fail to understand these simple words, its no wonder that you got lost in front of comodo, as it did not fit your thoughts.
Instead of disabling or setting features of comodo to your likings, you need things to be disabled for all.
You dont look in taskmanagers, you dont care. You can only describe your feelings. That is not enough to determine a quality of security.
Even as i showed you an example of a phoning trojan, you still dont get it.
Edit: Once i got told, comodo might require better computers to run soon…
While i used it to reduce the un-necessary process load.
And the introduced userfriendlyness is actually annoying me 
Weird :o
Long text short meaning:
Be happy.
Dont try to talk away other attempts.
I wish you a button.
I hope that comodo stays the usefull product that it was with version 5.10, as long as you dont press this new button. 
Discussion solved.
I never said that I wanted anything disabled or unavailable for all. All I ever said was that I don’t get why people still want to do things the old Comodo way when it is no longer necessary to do so. You want the options back? Fine, I have no problem with that. I just don’t get why.
Because not everyone wants or does things the way you do. It’s that simple!
Short 1:
I hated antivirus routines to happen un-necessary. Hated to waste resources (mind, technic, mechanic).
Hips fixed that.
Hips mean one thing to me False Positives. That is all I ever got from using them. Everything they blocked I already new was safe I reported several times the False Positives but nothing change after at least 5 new versions the same things kept being ■■■■■■■ with by the hips. So finally I said enough is enough and will never use them again.
Look, I installed my CIS 6 by default, I tweaked it to proactive config. like Chiron’s High quality HDMI cables in comparison - Gizmo's Best and he recommends not to use HIPS for non-geeks as it is redundant with BB module. So that is it, why it is so automated and I like it better this way. I don’t need or ever want to go “deeper” in the CIS suite as something (me!) is gotta get “broken”. So CIS 6 gotta stay simple and automatized while being tweakable, this way!! 88)
Don’t want to go (to do…) this : Comodo Firewall - Web Browser rule (hardened) | Wilders Security Forums
You describe the “userfriendly auto mechanisms”, not the hips. You have to wait until someone fixes problems.
Hips does block if you dont allow. You are safe on your own.
So all you need to do is to allow one time (one question) to use whatever you want.
As i said, hips is more userfriendly than “dumb computer” automatisms.
You noticed the same 
All this work that goes into programming a machine instead of explaining with a simple text how easy it is to use. Thats a waste.
And in the end, problems
But everytime you move a file or have a update Hips says something wrong and blocks it again. I am sick and tired of keep allowing the same app over and over again. So for me when one program may have as many as 6 to 8 hips allow to let a program work right is not worth the head ache they cause me. So for me NO HIPS!!!
He noticed nothing of the kind. What he encountered was HIPS working the way it is designed to do, questioning every action by every application with no regard to whether it is safe or not. That is in no way user friendly. Questioning any action of a safe application is not acceptable even if it only happens once. I am another one who will NEVER use HIPS again. Being protected with no interaction required is user friendly.
That is only how HIPS acts when it’s set to Paranoid, I have it set to Safe and I am not alerted for safe applications.
You may ask “But why are you using HIPS at Safe if you also have BB on?”
Well it’s because I’d rather have stuff blocked and then allow me to choose whether to allow or block the programs when they are trying to start instead of having them automatically start up in the sandbox and then give me no control at all. Yes I know the BB have a “Blocked” mode, but it doesn’t generate alerts (which I can’t wrap my head around)
Edit: This could also be solved by giving the option of HIPS alerts in the Sandbox, instead of the silent “Trust me” mode.
[at]MJR1
What you called false positives by HIPS in past HIPS implementations were not that at all. There really is no such thing as a false positive in HIPS. A classic HIPS will detect any “suspicious” action by any application and produce an alert. As CIS has progressed, it’s HIPS has been increasingly softened by the additions of whitelisting , Trusted Vendors lists and Trusted Files lists. The current HIPS is a lot less noisy than it was when I left for the exact reasons you stated. That was back when CIS was in the 5.3 stage. What made it worse for me back then was that Comodo was refusing to add game makers like Blizzard, Steam, and Valve to the Trusted Vendors so every time one of my games received an update , I had to jump through all the hoops of allowing the new files all over again just as you described. It just became too annoying.
With this V6, because the game makers (most of them anyway) are trusted, I get no alerts of any kind, not even from the firewall, when the games get updates. The only exception has been LOTRO (Lord of the Rings Online) which alerts when the main .exe of the game has changed and it doesn’t match the known hash any more. This is only because for some strange reason Turbine, the maker of the game, does not sign the main game file when all the other executables of the game are signed. I can’t blame that on Comodo so all is well.
I allow something. I dont allow each question to reach that. I dont let a program dictate. Auto sandbox dictates.
I rationalize the process.
I agree. If you think you would have to answer each question on its own… you are doing it wrong
My security is so silent. Only when i need to act, i have to act.
Sandbox did 99,9% un-necessary stuff and interrupted. It annoyed me!
I dont want it to act all day.
I allow. Or its blocked. Thats userfriendly because its predictable. And because its easy… If you dont get confused by thinking about what “geeks” want or ask you to do.
Again. You can not speak for the general.
DCH48, you dont get questions from the firewall, because its “out allow” set in your case.
I hope you dont load a trojan that phones… it would agree… thats userfriendly.
Then how come I have gotten firewall alerts for unknown things that were restricted by the Behavior Blocker? I don’t believe a trojan like you describe would be successful. It would either be detected by a signature or blocked by the BB if it was new. Also I can speak for the general more than most others who post here since I approach things from their viewpoint and not strictly from my own.
Another thing is that the games I referred to require both incoming and outgoing to be allowed and therefore require exceptions in just the default Windows firewall. I now don’t even get firewall alerts for incoming because they are trusted and I’m loving it
guys guys… whats is going on here?
let me explain what is the problem in cis6 interface for the normal user that dont care about the securitu suit itself.
When I install my security suite, i take a look at all the informations that this security suite can provide me. I take a look at all the graphs, all the texts, all the options inside it. Thats not an geek behavior. Its a behavior of who just care about his security. The problem in cis6 is that all these informations are “hidden” (not so hidden but still…) and when you want to know more about whats going on with your machine, you will have to go search for these informations, and thats where cis6 fails for EVERY USER.
You dont have to be a geek to understand my point. But you need to be an a$$ to ignore this lack of features/informations on cis6 gui…
simple as that.