Comodo Firewall Pro 3.x is ruined by its Hopeless install & update code....

Good Day, (CNY)

I adopted Comodo Firewall Pro 3.x within a week of its final release…

I like it Very Much…,
…But I have grown to fear & hate its updates (Particularly the new…

It would seem that not enough pre release testing is ever done (both alpha &/or beta)…
And the Poor wording (ie lack of clarity & or explanation) in the install/update procedure is Very Obvious…

Thank You,


I personally think that the update procedure is awkward, unnecessarily drawn out and could should be simplified.

Why can’t the update just update the components that have changed etc, rather than having to download the whole file, un-install the existing version, install the new version.
It took 3 reboots yesterday (un-install, install, ready to use) to complete the process - not really acceptable! Indeed enough to probably stop a lot of people bothering with updating.

You could use an option of trickle feed, (if the user initially sets up the firewall to trickle downloads) they could be downloaded in the background and automatically installed upon shut down, a bit like Windows Update. ???

I agree with you, the worst of it is that users settings and everythings CFP learns on its own about executables on your computer is lost after an update until last release I could import an older configuration (one I just exported before running the update) but the last update won’t let me do it!
So now it’s just like I had install CFP for the very first time :confused:

The lack of ability to import the previous configurations saved from older versions is not acceptable. It really is asking a lot if you have to re-configure the firewall every time a major update happens. There were about 60 or 70 items defined in the old Network Security Policy and a number of port sets, zones and policies for both Defense+ and the Firewall. Now I can’t even see what was there for reference without reverting to an older version. It is also scary to see how the attempt to import the old configuration works. It looks just fine - the import and select dialogs show that it was successful, but in fact none of the previous rules imported. There are not even the Global Rules or Trusted Zone rules in place. You may as well not have a firewall at all. If you did not check the rules after importing and went online trusting that you were protected, you might get a rude shock.

I didn’t realise I’d lost all my configurations until I browsed this forum. I had wondered why D+ and the Firewall were a bit noisy today.

I am at the point right now where I simply cannot get a clean install to work properly beyond version .277. I can update OK, but I cannot do a fresh install of either .295 0r .304 without the “firewall is not functioning properly” message. The diagnostics tell me that problems were found, but can never do anything to fix them.

Assuming that the “update” feature offers a configuration equivalent to a later full install, there are no “problems” with my system, because the updated work fine. In short, the recent installers are broken.

This has been an interesting week. Typically I have had good success with the update processes, but these latest releases really should have had a “please uninstall and reinstall” approach.

I was happily plugging along on 14.X until I got the popup letting me know there was an update… i ignored it for a couple days and decided to update early this week. I let the auto update do it’s job and was up and running on 16.X but with my rules all lost/messed. Not a big deal, I’ll just retrain a few things, and all should be good… this was furthest from the truth… it wasn’t prompting for learning any rules which made installing things kinda difficult…

…here’s me trying to update my LOTRO and download my latest Steam pack games… and all the games that did download would crash to the desktop after launching them… very annoying (:AGY)

then the 17.X autoupdate chimed in… and i figured… Great!! I need this… It did it’s job and even suggested I dump my rules to usher in some new version/technique… gladly i figured… but rules i made didn’t seem to stick, or reverted to custom, where I had selected trusted…

… so on the 3rd/4th day after LOTRO finished repatching itself (a count of over 11,000 downloaded patch files)… I uninstalled and reinstalled CFP completely.

This was the best move I made in the entire process, but was not without it’s own drama… It was the first time I had seen an error message within CFP that it could not start the firewall service and suggested i do a repair… thankfully the repair seemed to work and I am back in business with things operating like I figure they should.

what a ride… :THNK

Obviously I am a committed comodo enthusiast, because if i was in the shoes of a comodo newcomer who on their 1st comodo update had experienced what I did… there would have been a fairly high chance CFP might not be loaded on my system from that point forward.

non-beta/official patches need to be more polished than this. (:AGL)

please keep it easy to keep the comodo love alive (CLY)

They fixed it!!! The CFP update now imports the old saved configuration files. That will save a lot of work for everyone.

more clicks! we need more clicks!

Well that was quick was it not ladies? How much time since this post was made an the latest update doing ‘the job’? (V)

Good Day Dear fellow victims,

I will now install the new version in a test PC, as I have learnt Not to trust the functionality of new Comodo releases…
That I have to take this approach is Very sad, & it says a lot about the recent Comodo releases…

Thank You,


What major security software have you used that hasn’t had problems/issue’s at some point? Please, don’t keep this secret from me! ;D

The 18.X update (from 17.X) went very smoothly.

I’m not so sure that importing old configurations is a good idea, seeing as it was mentioned that there were some enhancements to gain by redoing your rules… unless the import is actually a merge

[ at ]JoiletJake,
I encourage you to re-evaluate the contribution to the thread that your last 2 posts have made. This is a thread where people are honestly voicing their concerns with installs/updates in the 14.X to 17.X range. I for one would like to think that this will be an era to not repeat. Official releases are measured with a different stick than alpha’s and beta’s, hence the purpose behind the thread. I am not asking for you to agree with the opinions posted here, but to accept/respect them as other people’s opinions… as we apply the same courtesy to you.

Good Day Dear M0ng0d,

Thank You Very Much for your Greatly Appreciated & Valuable feedback & info…

Best wishes,


Hello roberta,

I’m a little less shy on applying updates… I guess I have the Comodo Beta Tester badge sewn tightly to my sleeve for good. I guess that’s what happens after… :o gulp :o wowzers… in 4 months… 2 years of watching CFP grow!

I was taken by surprise how badly the official 16.X and 17.X patches went (certainly not the norm), but with 18.X patch applying pain-free, I can’t help but to breathe easier :■■■■

And I trust that after a few more successful patches on your test PC, we’ll all be right back in the “thick of things” with the rest of the security junkies that just got to have the latest and greatest… well, at least I’ll still be that security ■■■■■ (:WIN)


I would also encourage against over dramatic thread titles that are becoming all too common, many of which, not this case granted, have been the result of various things including user error, conflicts due to other software.

The firewall has not been ‘ruined.’ A mistake or error was made which has been swiftly rectified, hardly the definition of ‘ruins.’

Also, as noted in your final post - I was taken by surprise how badly the official 16.X and 17.X patches went (certainly not the norm), but with 18.X patch applying pain-free.

My points still stand, point me to a security software company that releases their products in a state of perfection. It’s not possible considering all the variations and combinations of hardware and software out there on people’s PC’s.

All I ask (and expect from freeware) is- where an honest error is made, attend to it promptly. This was done in this case.

Allow me to take my Comodo supporter/fan-boy hat off for a moment, and play the logical/impartial side of the fence in an effort to expose what I feel the heart and soul of this thread are about…

Comodo had a point of releasing regular beta/RC versions. It is/was these versions that have/had all the liberties of being imperfect… because they are/were beta and/or RC. And when the forums settled down on negative feedback on a beta/RC version, and positive feedback started rolling in like mad, and Comodo themselves felt comfortable with the code… then official versions were released.

I miss the days of people chanting for release dates because they were happy with the Beta/RC and wanted the warm and fuzzy of the version being called Official. This is what kept Comodo the security software company that releases their products in a state of perfection. This is what separated Comodo from the pack and built a strong reputation… one might say that “those days appear to be over”… another might say “the streak has come to an end”… however you want to spell it… it’s not a cause for celebration… nor is it a moment to sweep anything under the rug, like nothing happened.

To most people, Comodo IS CFP… look at how many wonderful/“gotta have” applications are still being planned or are in Beta/Alpha… Today, CFP IS the flagship product… and the foundation of the company’s desire for “Building Trust Online”… if posters here are doing anything, aren’t they reminding Comodo of this vision? Because the warning is, “if errors become common-place, trust is tough to sell/earn”.

As there were no conflicts with anything other than what the comodo updater delivered, the only thing left to do is take the statements in the proper context… of course the sky is not falling… but isn’t sharing the dissatisfaction/disappointment something for Comodo to learn from? Or are forums only meant to be happy places? I know in my moments of frustration, this was the thread I zoned in on… because in that moment… it had a ring to it that felt right.

But I’m always up for the challenge of word-smithing… so if I take the thread title in my mind, play with some nouns and such, I can easily bend it to read…

Comodo’s trust is tarnished by seemingly Half-hearted QA on back-to-back update code releases

Whichever title you prefer, it contains the message for Comodo to take to heart for all future releases… considering what they desire is our trust.

… and if this makes me one of the “ladies”, then go fetch me my purse so I can club some “Release Readiness” people with it.

This concludes my broadcast of the logical/impartial side of the fence… (:AGL)


Wrong. Most people started configuration from very beginning because there was silence from Comodo staff about upcoming fixed update. 3 days lost (you may convert it to money, - that’s about freeware :wink:
BTW AFAIK if you import old settings they override new improvements - not integrates. So is error really fixed?

I suppose it’s possible that Comodo said nothing immediately because they didn’t know there was a problem. From confirmation to identification to rectification in three days, is, IMHO after 25+ years in the industry (not that that makes my opinion worth more than yours) pretty bloody good.

3 days lost (you may convert it to money, - that's about freeware ;)


BTW AFAIK if you import old settings they override new improvements - not integrates. So is error really fixed?

So, it operates the way it used to. Does that make it a non-error? (the preceeding was a tongue in cheek attempt at humour only).

Much, much clearer instructions were/are required and hopefully Comodo wil have learnt from this. I don’t think it is their intention to release shoddy code.

Ewen :slight_smile: