I’m gonna install UPHClean and see if I get the same error.
Here is a text about it.
[i]"Microsoft has created a tool, UPHCLEAN (User Profile Hive Cleanup Service), that allows the system to monitor applications that access the user registry hives, and determine if an application has left keys open at logoff. If this happens, UPHCLEAN will log the application name and the keys in question, release the keys in question and complete the logoff process. This will not only allow users to log off cleanly, but also allow the problem application to be flagged.
UPHCLEAN has an option to only report the problem applications without forcing open handles to close. To do this, edit the registry and add two keys at HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINESYSTEMCurrentControlSetServicesUPHCleanParameters. The keys, both DWORD, should be named REPORT_ONLY and CALLSTACK_LOG, and set to a hex or decimal value of 1."[/i]
I’m continuing to get TCP In port 80 requests from applications that I’ve never had before. I’ve just gone onto MS Office Update and whilst downloading the updates I had a svchost TCP In Port 80 from 84.53.137.16. When I denied it the download from MS stopped.
When I used Kerio I had a universal block rule for TCP and UDP In for svchost (except for port UDP Port 123).
Now I’ve always been led to believe that there is no reason to allow TCP In connections from outside my LAN but I’m getting them for Internet Explorer, Firefox and Thunderbird. I’ve set block rules for these. But I never had to before this beta.
These block rules are now preventing some web sites fully loading. I can see the rule logged. I’m going back to the previous version, something is greatly wrong with this beta.
Is this something new for this beta? I don’t have these requests on my laptop running v2.3.6.81 nor did I have them before.
In fact, as I’m behind a router and its firewall is on (I’ve just checked) then where are these TCP In requests coming from? Unsolicited connections would be stopped by my router so what’s going on?
My confidence in CPF is fading with these betas… sorry.
I also have to confirm this problem, but not with UPHClean (not instaled on my laptop) but with Notebook Hardware control. Reason writen in eventlog is the same one as above (Notebook Hardware Control : ERROR → Could not load the NHC driver!). Problem seems to be definately connected with Comodo Firewall because when firewall in uninstalled everything works fine. When I start NHC manually after login everything works fine.
Regarding other issues posted here: I have no problem with BSOD or any other problem so far on my system. (wel havel disapering log entries after restart, but thats not error of this RC2 but it’s general Comodo Firewall problem)
Yep, I have the same problem. If I turn the FF off the Sites loads fine, turn it on with blockrules for TCP In conncetions om Port 0 some sites stop at the half while loading.
Or pages with some thumbnails. Some thumbs get loaded, other not.
On the beginning I think it was my ISP thats work wrong,
but now I read your posting I´m shure its cfp.
And when I turn the Firewall off…it need a little time firefox work right again.
I must step back to the stable release versions cause the other betas don´t like McAfee/Alcohol.
A step forward simultaneous a backward one (:SAD)
And now I´m waiting for a comment from the technicans
what up with this Port 0 incomming connections (:NRD)
I would like to report that I have exactly the same issues on my machine. As for the Avast update issue, all the Windows event logs say is that “Function SuperCopyFile() has failed. Return code is 00000005.” Updating after all services load (boot up finished) does not give any error or log messages (completes correctly). Also, seems that the network interfaces load very late in the boot up sequence now (don’t see this if RC2 is uninstalled). RC2 seems to interupt the loading of the HTTP service which prevents the uPNP service from loading; manual starting of uPNP worked OK. Just a suggestion, but are you trying to get RC2 to run like a service without actually being a service? All the issues listed so far (in this and other posts) seem to be timing related issues where CFP RC2 has blocked some network related services from starting until CFP is loaded but CFP is loaded as an application (started after all services are loaded). Any thoughts?? Just my two cents so far but have run into the same issue when betaing other firewalls (KIS, OP4, etc.).
There is no rule for it. The computer freezes up before everything loads up. I can start Arovax Shield after everything loads though and no problems. The problem is when you enable Arovax Shield to automatically start with Windows.
Hi,
I’ve just installed RC2 and have following problems:
Firefox stops working (CPF has a blocking rule for TCP/UDP in/out for Firefox.exe). Why ?
Outlook 2003 with Spambayes. Spambayes stops working. Is possible ?
Further to my problems with TCP In connections I’ve just noticed that this beta and previous ones show TCP In connections in the Connections dialog for Firefox, for instance. v2.3.6.81 does not, the only TCP In connections are for localhost (which in these betas are not shown at all).
What is going on here? I just have no trust any more in what the Connections dialog reports, what with missing connections that other programs show, and now TCP In connections. There shouldn’t be any TCP In connections to Firefox. There is no reason for a web browser to have TCP In connections except to localhost. If these were unsolicited TCP In connections from someone trying to hack me then my router would have stopped it before it reached my PC. So I’ve no idea what CPF is playing at here.
Seriously, this isn’t a Release Candidate. Release a version of 2.3.6.81 with languages by all means but these betas are a disaster, to be frank. I don’t take any pleasure is saying that, believe me. The more you mess with the OLE problem (or whatever) the more it has created other problems which to my mind are very much more serious because they point to issues of confidence and trust as I don’t know what CPF is reporting and attempting to do any more. Quite frankly I was having less hassle with CPF with the OLE problems.
I was thinking about downloading this beta, but after hearing your complaint. I think ill wait. Looks like we need a RC3. Lets hope all this gets worked out b4 the final.
Yes, like MSB it say, it´s strange that cfp don´t show the programms which act as server and listen on ports anymore.
You only see active connections so you can´t look which programm runs in background and listen.
Skip connection on 127.0.0.0 is disabled in my configuration.
Shure, the ff alert if a program for that you don´t create a rule (if you disable believe comodo trusted application) try to get a connection out, but in summary with the strange incoming tpc port 0 connection comodo dice with the trust into this firewall (:SAD)
Shure its beta but better lock this RC2 and make a fix,
the ole problems are not that kind serious as the firewall functions.
I still believe in the firewall at all, cause the stable version runs still fine but this RC2 is a little mistake (:KWL)
On CFPs Connections screen, soyabeaner pointed me at Egemen’s explanation of how this now works in 2.4 (active traffic only, no passive/listening traffic) that I had previously missed. Re: 2.4.8.122: No Listening Ports
These are beta releases. So if you don’t understand what ppl mean under beta-testing and what can be a beta release, you’d better not to try it. Trust or no trust? Oh come on, this isn’t the school, sorry.
Ark
PS: this program is free, you’d better never forget that.
I have seen that, Kail, and had already come to the conclusion (based on monitoring my system) that with these “TCP In” connections, what it is showing is the inbound response to the outbound request; it’s just showing it like that now, where it didn’t use to.
This definitely creates a sense of confusion as to what’s going on. I only have confidence because I am watching such things fairly closely to make sure I know what’s going on…
Comodo Firewall Pro RC3 has just been released, we are going to go ahead and close this topic as progress is moving forward to the final release of Comodo Firewall Pro 2.4. We thank everyone for their valuable time and feedback with this RC2 release.
