I see from the latest results that Comodo and Matousec have resolved their issues and CIS 3.8 is top of the tree.
I thought COMODO wasn’t going to pay for a retest? Or, is this one of those retests?
What changed? Or didn’t they pay?
Also, the latest Outpost version wasn’t tested. Why not?
I also don’t understand this tests. They’re not firewall tests! They’re IPS tests!!
To test a firewalll, they should setup a system with a firewall, and then try to hack into that system, and see how efficient the firewall is!!! That would be a firewall test!
That test is a joke in what comes to the firewall testing. Otherwise, should just be renamed to IPS test.
I found it interesting to note SafeSurf was able to be terminated (it is a browser plugin). CIS includes BO protection, so users are still protected without SafeSurf.
These results show the strength of CIS as a security product…
The (few) items it did fail need to be corrected in a future release.
I doubt that Comodo have paid Matousec given their comments on here,more likely the fee was waived.As to the title ‘firewall leaktests’ I agree that is misleading,they test Mamutu as a firewall wtf !!? I’d presume that they’re using an older version of Outpost due to refusal to pay also.What is good to see however is that CIS did do well in this test.
:-TU Agree with you guys.The test should be renamed.I don't know and to be honest i don't care about what they test but it sure it's not inbound protection.
I install online armour or outpost start two large torrents (+400)connections over 3 MB/s download speed the computer goes insane.The CPU is at 30 -50% systems slows to a crawl
Comodo ,Zone Alarm and a few others handle this perfect.No extra CPU from them.So even when CIS was not in the 1st place it was still the best for my usage.I don't consider it's direct competitors firewalls.Good HiPS maybe,if u don't have highspeed p2p you might not even noticed their flawes but for sure for me comodo is the best firewall.From this i can tell that they are interested only in marketing that Matousec provides as sadly most users consider that a firewall test.
:-TU Hope Comodo will still remain in the future focused on the inbound protection too.
A firewall should stop things in both directions, unless you choose to allow them. Otherwise it’s just a one way window of opportunity. How it achieves that does not really matter, it is still a firewall I think.
The GRC file sharing and port tests proves the inbound protection, but even Windows firewall should manage that.
I don’t think CIS will ever reach 100%. If they used the same tests as last time, 100% is not expected:
in this latest test, CIS “failed” kill3f.exe, crash7.exe, SSS.exe, and socksnif.exe
According to egemen above, CIS failing crash7.exe, SSS.exe, and socksnif.exe are okay.
Now, kill3f.exe (from last test):
So, CIS really did score 100% I guess…
Thanks for the clarification, Fazio.
Thanks Melih and thanks egemen for this wonderful product :-TU
In more than one thread, members said, that the newest version of CIS would have 100%.
Well, before talking, you should think twice.
Comodo has used Matousec for marketing before, so now I see it hypocrital to say ‘Our priorities are to protect against malware and NOT to pass some tests for marketing gains!’.
If anyone wants, I can find news posted on Comodo’s webapage using Matousec’s tests for marketing.
The TOP priority is to protect users. I don’t see anyone saying that marketing isn’t a LESSER priority. Comodo seems to be doing #1, first. That they build a firewall that protects users first, and ALSO passes tests better is just fine with me…
I would hate to see them spending a great deal of time passing tests at the expense of #1. Nothing here indicates they are doing that.
We did not pay.
Thank you very much bluginio for realising the quality of the product. Its difficult for many people to understand the real quality of the product without being led by marketing gimmicks not because its difficult to know everything. So thank you for pointing out the quality of CIS.
It’s good that you didn’t pay but also good that COMODO’s at the #1 spot. When converting others to use CIS (rather than paid products), this is a good example to show them.
My computers always had malware on them before Comodo. Now, at my weekly cleanings, they have little to no malware (not too many cookies either). And the price is right!
:-TU :-TU :-TU :-TU
Were did most of your malware come from?
I don’t really remember. My laptop went all over the country in one lonely motel room after another. Also, I was connecting to a lot of networks in my company, not all of them maintained very well. I switched to Comodo Firewall in 2007. I stopped getting infected so much, and each version of Comodo has made it better for me. Now the malware I get is close to zero.
3% over the best rated PAID FOR firewall. Excellent work Melih, and team. :-TU
Cookies aren’t malware…
I’m worry about those tests that CIS didn’t pass…
Is COMODO going to improve itself on these tests in the future?