Comodo AV Version 5.12.256249.2599 Won't Update

I have been having problems keeping XP computers up-to-date as I’ve noted here and elsewhere.

The official solution is to copy a new, downloaded bases.cav file into the scanners and repair folders in safe mode. This usually doesn’t work for me, it will still say it can’t update and reports the old, last version number and date for the AV file.

I got better results if I deleted the TEMP folder inside the Quarantine folder. This is where incremental downloaded CAV files are stored before being amalgamated into bases.$$$.

But not for long. Why is CIS still reporting the old version number and date? I figured Comodo must be storing the version number and using that and not what is contained in the bases.cav file (if anything) - and a look at the registry file shows where: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\Software\Comodo\Firewall Pro\Configurations. The BaseVer key contains the version number.

So what I now have to do is:

  1. Get the bases.cav version from my working Windows 7 installation
  2. Note the version number in CIS About
  3. Write that to the registry key above
  4. Copy it into scanners and repair folders in Safe Mode
  5. Delete bases.$$$ and Quarantine/TEMP folder.
  6. Reboot

What a F pain in the A!

Next day… and after a week this has now failed 2 days running.

Could you describe in more detail what you mean with look somewhat different?

[b][u]EDIT:[/u][/b] Typically, initial contact recently has been with download.comodo.com [178.255.82.5] and requests are usually redirected to cdn.download.comodo.com [198.41.209.107], [198.41.208.108], [198.41.209.108], [198.41.209.106] or [198.41.208.107] cloudflare servers. On some occasions downloads.comodo.com [178.255.82.1] has been automatically selected by comodo though and in this case there has been no redirect. I think there may have been different redirects in the past. However, it makes no difference at the moment which servers are being used as all appear to have the same data but there is some evidence to suggest that this may not always be the case. In addition to this, comodo also continues to 'phone home' to other servers on a regular basis of course DESPITE all cloud-based options being disabled and me declining to accept comodo sending reports when it was first installed. There is only 1 way to apparently prevent comodo from effectively doing what is generally considered as being "spyware" and that's by configuring a firewall to block comodo's 'phone home' attempts !!! I've known about if for years and it's always been blocked but comodo really ought to be ashamed of themselves TBH if it's intentional because if a user has selected no reporting and no cloud-based scanning then this means that there is absolutely no excuse for any unexpected remote accesses to unexpected servers.

However unlikely it probably is, I must admit that every time I think about any of this strange activity and the regular unexplained problems with database updates … the very first thing that immediately springs to mind every time is that comodo and/or my system(s) have been compromised so perhaps someone would care to explain the seemingly unusual activity of redirects and other unauthorised connection attempts to remote servers ? I really don’t think there’s a serious problem (just a bug) but comodo does seem to be ridiculously easy to bypass completely so I wouldn’t be all that surprised to find out malware with the ability to do just that has been around for years.

CIS is very hard to bypass. This is a separate problem and it would be better if you would start a separate topic for this. Could you in that topic provide the servers CIS is contacting.

I agree with and/or already knew about everything you posted above with the exception of this ! I’ve never actually bothered to look in “quarantine” when the system isn’t running normally (there’s no access normally of course) so I hadn’t spotted that it was the hiding place for the cached data I just knew was hanging around somewhere. Every time I’ve manually updated the database it’s just been a quick copy of the file and back to normal again. I’ll be doing some poking around shortly to see what else (if anything) may be hiding in there that could help get to the bottom of this problem. Many thanks for the info :slight_smile:

I’ve been using comodo continually since V3 was released and although many users have reported similar update problems many times over the years, the very first time I saw it was in January this year. Once manually fixed, the problem didn’t recur for me for quite some time despite other users still reporting having the problem. However, just recently it’s been getting silly and I’ve been regularly seeing comodo unable to update the database for lengthy periods of time and several occasions when I’ve had to do 1 or more manual updates to fix the problem.

Whilst there has almost certainly been some relatively minor problem with comodo and database updates for donkey’s years it’s definitely getting worse and happening much more frequently. Something must have changed and my guess is that a major change happened sometime early January 2014 and just recently something has made matters even worse !

Some other thoughts and finding just for the record and in case anyone else is interested:

DNS ISSUES

cmdagent appears to only perform a DNS lookup when it first loads and then seems to cache the results forever. At the very least it does not appear to take any notice of the TTL that’s for sure. I have evidence to show that cmdagent obtained the server addresses initially and then repeatedly used the same server addresses for all subsequent new connections to the servers over a period more than a hour DESPITE the DNS data actually having changed several minutes after the initial lookup when the TTL expired and continuing to do so at frequent relatively short intervals thereafter.

Although the cached address is most likely going to remain a valid address in all but the most unusual of circumstances, it still makes a complete mockery of using DNS to effectively load balance several servers sharing the same name. For instance, cdn.download.comodo.com has 5 associated IPs and the TTL seems to be typically just a few minutes. cmdagent performed a lookup and cached the first IP when it initially loaded. Subsequent manual DNS look-ups over the next hour or so resulted in the order of the server IPs changing several times yet cmdagent continued to use the initial cached IP indefinitely.

When there was (presumably) only a single IP with any load balancing being performed by hardware there was no problem but now comodo have changed the way data is being served, it’s not really acceptable practice to apparently cache a DNS look-up indefinitely. Apart from anything else, DNS records can (and do) change - that’s why they have a TTL ! At best it’s bad practice and at worst it’s a significant source of server problems.

RESOURCE HOGGING

Once comodo has encountered an update problem it continues to retry updating the database every ~10 minutes. This means cmdagent needs to do 3 to 5 minutes of intensive processing every 10 minutes until such time as an update is successful. End result: cmdagent consuming at least 30% of CPU time on average (with a significant period of time closer to 100%) continually for several days if not weeks. No wonder my poor old system feels like it’s ground to complete halt whenever this problem shows up ! A huge portion of all available resources are being hogged by cmdagent for processing the same old ‘bad’ incremental update data over and over and over again despite the fact that it will almost certainly never result in a successful update.

Generally speaking, only a manual install of an updated and valid full database together with all subsequent incremental updates being ‘good’ can resolve the problem. Only then will cmdagent return to updating the database once every hour or so. The caching of DNS and downloaded data does nothing to help the situation either. If there were a genuine problem with some of the data, it had been changed or there was a server problem then cmdagent will never attempt to download data again until such time you either reboot or kill and restart cmdagent.

PHONING HOME

There are (were !) and almost always have been multiple and very regular attempts made by comodo to connect to no-dns-yet.ccanet.co.uk [199.66.201.22] and [91.209.196.27] for instance along with numerous other IPs on port 4447/8. This has been going on ever since some time way back in 2010 if not earlier. It was the simple fact that I suddenly found my access logs were packed full of these completely unauthorised connection attempts after installing comodo that led me to deal with the problem and they’ve been blocked ever since. There is even some historic evidence of port scanning coming from these IPs. My sensible guess is that comodo is (was !) probably attempting to test the firewall and report or upload vast amounts of stuff that it had encountered some problem with such as files that failed AV check and so on. However, Mr.Paranoia reckons comodo is simply attempting to spy on me and report back on absolutely everything I do no matter what or why on a 24/7 basis :lol:

Much like the database update issues, there is absolutely no shortage of other users reporting these unauthorised connection attempts and similar strange things going on after installing various versions of comodo. A simple investigation on any of the fairly lengthy list of IPs I’ve logged over the last 4/5 years for making unauthorised remote connections and/or being suspected of other strange activity usually shows them all relating to “Comodo CA” in some way. There are plenty of threads on these forums (and elsewhere) reporting similar findings and at no time has anyone apparently given any sort of reasonable explanation needless to say ! Any so-called security application making unauthorised connections and suchlike is just wrong in every way possible no matter what the specific circumstances may be or how innocent it might be.

‘DUBIOUS’ INCREMENTAL UPDATE FILES

I can’t really explain why I think some files look ‘dubious’ as it’s just a feeling I get when I look at the data but there does appear to be a pattern. Some files tend to look somewhat different and it’s these files that tend to result in comodo ending up with the update failure problem. However it’s not a simple case of a “when this happens then the end result is always that” kinda thing. Both of the 2 systems I have comodo on behave similarly but somewhat differently. They don’t always fail at exactly the same time on the same file but that’s primarily because 1 is powered and being used almost 24/7 whilst the other is only powered and in use intermittently. Frequently updating the database definitely appears to minimise the risk of a problem showing up. However, once there is a ‘bad’ incremental update to download then the problem will almost certainly show up eventually on both systems because it will totally prevent comodo from updating the database even if there are several earlier ‘good’ incremental updates also available. The only strange and unexplained situation is when the problem has been seen to exist for a period of time, often several hours, but then it suddenly resolves itself without any manual intervention being necessary. The only plausible explanations I can think of are genuine server or connection problems and incremental update files being changed after they’ve been released.

BYPASSING COMODO

I’m not going to say anything more on this other than it sure seems too easy to me. I know nothing about how to implement dubious things on remote systems or indeed about any other dodgy activities for that matter and I have absolutely no desire to find out either … but if I did then I’d certainly know where to start and what I’d be trying to do first !

EDIT: To minimise the issue of cmdagent hogging all the resources it can get it’s grubby hands on while there is an update problem but an appropriate full database download isn’t yet available to manually fix it, add a temporary firewall rule to block access to download.comodo.com and downloads.comodo.com This doesn’t appear to have any obvious side-effects but it does prevent comodo from continually attempting to compile a new database with incremental update data that it’s never going to able to use successfully. Disabling updates and removing the server addresses in comodo settings didn’t appear to have the desired effect unfortunately. Don’t forget to remove the firewall rule when you manually update the database in due course though or you’ll never get any subsequent updates !

[u][b]DNS ISSUES[/b][/u]

cmdagent appears to only perform a DNS lookup when it first loads and then seems to cache the results forever. At the very least it does not appear to take any notice of the TTL that’s for sure. I have evidence to show that cmdagent obtained the server addresses initially and then repeatedly used the same server addresses for all subsequent new connections to the servers over a period more than a hour DESPITE the DNS data actually having changed several minutes after the initial lookup when the TTL expired and continuing to do so at frequent relatively short intervals thereafter.

Although the cached address is most likely going to remain a valid address in all but the most unusual of circumstances, it still makes a complete mockery of using DNS to effectively load balance several servers sharing the same name. For instance, cdn.download.comodo.com has 5 associated IPs and the TTL seems to be typically just a few minutes. cmdagent performed a lookup and cached the first IP when it initially loaded. Subsequent manual DNS look-ups over the next hour or so resulted in the order of the server IPs changing several times yet cmdagent continued to use the initial cached IP indefinitely.

When there was (presumably) only a single IP with any load balancing being performed by hardware there was no problem but now comodo have changed the way data is being served, it’s not really acceptable practice to apparently cache a DNS look-up indefinitely. Apart from anything else, DNS records can (and do) change - that’s why they have a TTL ! At best it’s bad practice and at worst it’s a significant source of server problems.

Could be a related issue.

[u][b]RESOURCE HOGGING[/b][/u]

Once comodo has encountered an update problem it continues to retry updating the database every ~10 minutes. This means cmdagent needs to do 3 to 5 minutes of intensive processing every 10 minutes until such time as an update is successful. End result: cmdagent consuming at least 30% of CPU time on average (with a significant period of time closer to 100%) continually for several days if not weeks. No wonder my poor old system feels like it’s ground to complete halt whenever this problem shows up ! A huge portion of all available resources are being hogged by cmdagent for processing the same old ‘bad’ incremental update data over and over and over again despite the fact that it will almost certainly never result in a successful update.

Generally speaking, only a manual install of an updated and valid full database together with all subsequent incremental updates being ‘good’ can resolve the problem. Only then will cmdagent return to updating the database once every hour or so. The caching of DNS and downloaded data does nothing to help the situation either. If there were a genuine problem with some of the data, it had been changed or there was a server problem then cmdagent will never attempt to download data again until such time you either reboot or kill and restart cmdagent.

Do you or anybody know if this is typical for v5.x or also for v6 or v7?

[u][b]PHONING HOME[/b][/u]

There are (were !) and almost always have been multiple and very regular attempts made by comodo to connect to no-dns-yet.ccanet.co.uk [199.66.201.22] and [91.209.196.27] for instance along with numerous other IPs on port 4447/8.This has been going on ever since some time way back in 2010 if not earlier. It was the simple fact that I suddenly found my access logs were packed full of these completely unauthorised connection attempts after installing comodo that led me to deal with the problem and they’ve been blocked ever since.

Ports 4447 and 4448 are for the cloud look up. Port 80 is used for program and av updates (from the top of my head)
There is even some historic evidence of port scanning coming from these IPs. My sensible guess is that comodo is (was !) probably attempting to test the firewall and report or upload vast amounts of stuff that it had encountered some problem with such as files that failed AV check and so on. However Mr.Paranoia reckons comodo is simply attempting to spy on me and report back on absolutely everything I do no matter what or why on a 24/7 basis :lol:
If Comodo wanted to harvest it would be client side initiated wouldn’t it? Please realise that Comodo executables have the Outgoing Only policy which does not respond to incoming traffic.

That you’re paranoid does not mean you should throw out all reasoning out of the window … :wink: :P0l

Much like the database update issues, there is absolutely no shortage of other users reporting these unauthorised connection attempts and similar strange things going on after installing various versions of comodo. A simple investigation on any of the fairly lengthy list of IPs I've logged over the last 4/5 years for making unauthorised remote connections and/or being suspected of other strange activity usually shows them all referring to "Comodo CA" in some way. There are plenty of threads on these forums (and elsewhere) reporting similar findings and at no time has anyone apparently given any sort of reasonable explanation needless to say ! A so-called security application making unauthorised connections and suchlike is just wrong in every way possible no matter what the specific circumstances may be.
Using a white list of trusted software vendors which relies on digital signatures will cause this behaviour. Nothing sneaky. It's expected.
[u][b]'DUBIOUS' UPDATE FILES[/b][/u]

I can’t really explain why I think some files look ‘dubious’ as it’s just a feeling I get when I look at the data but there does appear to be a pattern. Some files tend to look somewhat different and it’s these files that tend to result in comodo ending up with the update failure problem. However it’s not a simple case of a “when this happens then the end result is always that” kinda thing. Both of the 2 systems I have comodo on behave similarly but somewhat differently. They don’t always fail at exactly the same time on the same file but that’s primarily because 1 is powered and being used almost 24/7 whilst the other is only powered and in use intermittently. Frequently updating the database definitely appears to minimise the risk of a problem showing up. However, once there is a ‘bad’ incremental update to download then the problem will almost certainly show up eventually on both systems because it will totally prevent comodo from updating the database even if there are several earlier ‘good’ incremental updates also available. The only strange and unexplained situation is when the problem has been seen to exist for a period of time, often several hours, but then it suddenly resolves itself without any manual intervention being necessary. The only plausible explanations I can think of are genuine server or connection problems and incremental update files being changed after they’ve been released.

This is the topic at hand.

[u][b]BYPASSING COMODO[/b][/u]

I’m not going to say anything more on this other than it sure seems too easy to me. I know nothing about how to implement dubious things on remote systems or indeed about any other dodgy activities for that matter and I have absolutely no desire to find out either … but if I did then I’d certainly know where to start and what I’d be trying to do first !

I am asking again to only post on the topic of problems with the updating of the av and not divert. Your diversions are not well documented, not free of conjecture and innuend. Please feel free to start separate topics on those. But I would like to ask you to corroborate your cases.

05/24/14
New 7-zip error

d/l’d from http://cdn.download.comodo.com/av/updates58/sigs/bases/bases.cav.z

unsupported compression method for BASE_END_USER_v18286.cav

I can’t expand this file…

(beside the MAIN problem of “failed to update the virus signature database”
Greg

addition:
This was ‘fixed’ by updating 7-zip from 7z465 to 7z920; some CHANGE in comodo…??

Still “failed to update the virus signature database”

If it was fixed by updating 7zip, its sounds like 7zip made the changes that broke it, then fixed it, not Comodo.

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxe72da2Bf1qablpd.gif

Hello guys.

I have exactly the same updating problem with CIS version 5.12 on Windows XP. Just a question before I make the decision to switch to another internet security software: is COMODO working on this problem? Upgrading to version 6 or 7 is not an option for me.

I’ve seen no evidence that they are the least bit interested in this problem let alone working on it! V5.12 is 2 versions too old.

I think the AV module has no value for the versions. ( with safety ).
Updatings of bases take place.
Itself only FW I think much better in 5.x.x. versions.
You shouldn’t worry with safety.

I guess these COMODO-guys are too busy with fixing the problems in Dragon & IceDragon nowaday, aren’t they? :wink: In the meantime I am using your method to update the bases. It works well for me. Thank you for your respons, MSB and jenny66.

I can also get this to work for a while:

  1. Get the bases.cav version from my working Windows 7 installation
  2. Note the version number in CIS About
  3. Write that to the registry key above
  4. Exit CIS
  5. Use KillSwitch to kill cmdagent service
  6. Copy bases.cav into /scanners and /repair folders
  7. Delete bases.$$$
  8. Restart CIS
  9. In Services, start cmdagent service
  10. Sacrifice a black chicken

I seems that there are computers on which 5.12…2599 updates , and computers on which don’t update.
So perhaps the problem with update is somewhere in the configuration?
So it might be possible to change something somewhere and fix the problem?
Or this is hidden policy of COMODO to force users to use newer version?
Such as M$ does?
The method of MSB do not work for me any more. But any way, if automatic updates don’t work - then this is the same as if update don’t work at all.
What to do now?
I try CIS 7 and i don’t like it! It is heaver than 5.12 ! It make my computer works with slight but frequent freezings. So it is useless for me.
If i can not continue to use v 5.12 , i will trow away all the cis and go to another AV.
But i still hope to continue to use CIS.
Is it too stupid?

My method above doesn’t work for me either now. Nor does copying bases.cav in Safe Mode. CIS doesn’t even see the new dated file.

I turn my main computer on for several hours a day. The Windows 7 laptop is on 24/7. This never has a problem updating.
I sometimes wonder if there are so many updates in a day that updating every 24 hours rather than every whatever on the laptop causes CIS not to be able to cope. The files are downloaded but for some reason they can’t be integrated into the main bases.cav file.

I’ve tried all the remedies suggested in various messages scattered throughout this forum and none work.

I’ve given up to be honest. In 30+ years of computing I’ve never had a virus or any other form of invasion mainly because of my security measures. If a virus did get in, it would still have to get past Defense+ etc., so I’ve stopped worrying about it.

Hi
It seems that cis sees the date of creation of bases.cav (11.11.2014 for now) and do not see date of modification. So if COMODO shares on the net newly created bases.cav it might help. But any way, it does not worth.
There is fixbases.exe in the scanner folder. It used to help , but not anymore .
When updating cis creates file bases.$$$ . It grows to about 36 Mb and then stops. And then appears message “failed to update …”.
Also temp folder in Quarantine is impossible to delete , because Quarantine is not accessible.
Temp folder is empty only after clearing of quarantine in cis main window.

Defence+ is much like UAC in WINDOWS 7 - annoying and useless. If Defence+ don’t know if something is virus, how do I would know that this is a virus? If anti virus is asking you "Hey, this could be a virus! Do you want to proceed? " what anti virus is that? And if this question in 99.999% of occasions is for safe programs then the only solution is to turn off Defence-.

About the viruses: I had such unfortunate experience with a virus. One day suddenly my computer gone BSOD. And after restart the computer was very slow and worked in slight but frequent freezings. (such as computer work with cis 7 installed). What i did not do? I tried as many anti virus as i could, avast (this program i used and it missed the virus initially), kaspersky , nod, mbam, and so on and so on . CIS too. No one helped. I decided that this is hardware problem. And bough a new computer…
And year or more after that i took the HDD. I mentioned that it still work slowly. Copied all files to another hdd, deleted the partition and created it again. Then copied back files. Now the disk worked fine.
And what surprise! Avast - again this program that missed the virus previous time but not only avast but CIS too. So avast - but new version- catch the virus. The virus was so nasty - no anti virus recognized it for months and perhaps years. The virus seems was creating some kind of second swap file on the same disk and this slowed down HDD. In addition and combination with the damage of NTFS and partition made by virus. Very nasty and no anti virus could handle it quickly. The infected file was 250Mb large - this explains.
How the virus came? Of course, that was I that searched for that virus, and finally found it! And holes in windows are not connected?

In 17+ years in computing in aggressive public environment, I have several viruses! All of them came from Microsoft holes. There was mo admin rights for the users, no active user evil deeds, just holes in windows. And this viruses was complete disasters for the entire networks. And various anti virus was doing the same: catch the virus, delete it , and few minutes after: catch the virus , delete it , and few minutes after: catch the virus , delete it , and few minutes after … until Microsoft manage to share the patch… Some times weeks after the disaster…

Ok i lie ! One virus came from a flash memory stick. This was very interesting. The virus had few modifications - all of them doing the same - hide all files from the flash. The virus relied mainly on human psychology - to click on hdd icon, in order to infect the computer .
I found the suspicious file and send it to virus total.com , and surprise! One of the modifications was recognized by set of 5 anti virus of 40 , and other modification was recognized by another set of 5 or 6 anti virus of 40 . And the vast majority of anti viruses recognized it as safe file. But it WAS virus!
Interesting was that Kingsoft was the only anti virus that recognized all modifications. And the question was : is Kingsoft so good? Or it just made the virus?
And then i sent the virus to avira - just because it’s function to send suspicious files was the first i found easiest. What happened? First i received message that the file is safe, but a week after i received new message that this is really a virus and in ONE OF THE NEXT updates it will be a definition for that virus.
Meanwhile we accommodated to the situation and managed to live without memory sticks.
I can’t imagine what would had happened if the virus first infected avira office or other anti virus offices? :slight_smile:

So you are lucky! Because you don’t know what holes Microsoft had left for your pleasure, and for pleasure of the viruses.
It is your LUCK that saved you.

It seems that suspicions about hidden COMODO policy to force users to use the new version are very reasonable.
This means only one:
“Farewell COMODO! It was good to know you since 2009 year, but as it is seen you don’t update any more. You don’t need me as a user anymore. Farewell.”

To access the Quarantine folder you need to take ownership. After that you will be able to empy the temp folder.

C:>subinacl.exe" /file “C:\Program Files\COMODO\COMODO Internet Security\Quarantine”
/setowner=dgftehg\Administrator
C:\Program Files\COMODO\COMODO Internet Security\Quarantine - CreateFile Error :
5 Access is denied.

Elapsed Time: 00 00:00:00
Done: 1, Modified 0, Failed 1, Syntax errors 0
Last Done : C:\Program Files\COMODO\COMODO Internet Security\Quarantine
Last Failed: C:\Program Files\COMODO\COMODO Internet Security\Quarantine - Creat
eFile Error : 5 Access is denied.

I can’t change ownership. But any way.
It would rather be better if we disassemble the cmdagent and fix the error of updates? :slight_smile:
Then it would be no need of taking ownership. :slight_smile:

COMODO , COMODO , My LOVE. What happened to you ? :frowning:

Or you think i would still keep losing my time if i do not love this program ? :frowning:

So Security tab in context menu in XP. CIS disables it.

Having this problem too on windows XP and v. 5.10 and after watching “finalizing…” for a long time the updates fail. I’ve also been using Comodo since 2006 or earlier. The update works fine on Windows 7. Trying the suggestions on page 3 (this is a huge thread and the problem obviously needs to be fixed.) As a side note does anyone have a link where I can download the latest v. 5.12?

You can download it from Where can i download the latest full AV database? or from this web page.

Thanks. I downloaded the bases.cav.z, unzipped them and put them in the appropriate folder C:\Program Files\COMODO\COMODO Internet Security\scanners and when I do an update it isn’t downloading all 211mb anymore. However, it did download some smaller files and again is stuck on “Virus Database Update (90%) Please wait while the virus database is being updated. This might take a few minutes… Finalizing…” and then Failed. So the incremental update failed to work.

Where can I download the Comodo internet security version 5.12? Currently using 5.10.