Comodo Firewall With AntiVirus

I was found this name on filehippo.com here Download Comodo Internet Security 12.2.4.8032 for Windows - Filehippo.com

They called a suite as Firewall+Antivirus.

I think is should happened because Comodo Internet Secuirty didn’t have some feature that’s internet security most have.
(Email scanner, anti phishing or others)

Maybe other module will available in next version soon.
(or as add-ons)

Any comment Please.

Hi Petit,

I don’t know why they call it like that.
They shouldn’t in any case because the name is defined by the vendor (Comodo).

As for the comment - the real-time (stressing) e-mail scanner was discussed many times here and in other forums.
Well, I know that you participated in this discussion for example ;):
https://forums.comodo.com/empty-t41840.0.html
(many more could be found by searching e.g. “email scan”, etc)

Such feature is damaging and causes corruption of users e-mail storage (sometime that is irrecoverable)
It is absolutely necessary to disable such service in any Antivirus
So that is good and correct that it’s not implemented in Comodo.

But again, if this or that feature currently included or not - should not be the reason for naming the Suite differently (the way I see it).

Cheers!

This is a completely ridiculous statement that can only be classified as FUD.
I have enabled email scanning from several AV software over the years in a variety of operating environments and have never experienced anything comparable to what you have described.

Please post a link to a reputable source providing proof of the possibility of this danger.

Did you use Norton ?

Symantec Employee wesleyj Symantec Employee Posts: 11 Registered: 07-28-2008

wesleyj

Message 4 of 4

Viewed 626 times

NAV does not scan e-mail using SSL connections. However, when you download an attachement or attempt to execute an attachement Auto-Protect will scan it.


http://community.norton.com/norton/board/message?board.id=nis_feedback&message.id=9027&query.id=878620#M9027

Hi axl,

Please take it easy about FUD… wrong term here

Please post a link to a reputable source providing proof of the possibility of this danger
In the link I provided above - here it is again https://forums.comodo.com/empty-t41840.0.html (read Reply #4) there are references to the forums and articles written by security experts like Robear Dyer MS MVP-IE, Mail Security and others.

If you disagree with them and those are not “reputable sources” according to your opinion - that is different story;
… if you never participated in e-mail storage recovery on a corporate level because real-time email scanning being enabled … lucky you,
but please don’t make conclusion about me spreading FUD

My regards

That looks like would be the criteria you would use to not call CIS a suite and also one of the reasons you opened this topic…

About Filehippo Comodo page pertaining Firewalls and Security section how would you suggest they should have to call it like considering that 99% of previous versions pertains Comodo Firewall alone and they have an Antivirus section that does not include the so called “suites” nor firewalls?

It looks like filehippo is willing to avoid duplicates but not to anticipate the creation of a suite specific section…

…whereas the current denomination makes clear that a firewall is included and that most of previous versions pertains only the firewall (included since 2006 starting with CFP 2.3).

[attachment deleted by admin]

I have read all the links you have provided, which is why I concluded that this is FUD.

All of your links reference OE exclusively; OE’s fragility is due to its ■■■■ message store design.
I did not know corporate level environments use OE?
Your last link references a post from an MVP which is almost five years old; anything more recent?
In any case, all of your references have Microsoft MVPs as “reputable” sources.
I have seen several ridiculous statements made by Microsoft MVPs regarding Comodo so forgive me if I don’t blindly accept their proclamations.

Essentially you are making a blanket statement about email-scanning using examples which as far as I can tell only relate to Outlook Express, and any blanket statement belongs in the Land of FUD.

Please provide a link from Microsoft, Lotus Notes, Symantec, etc. as these are true reference sources.

I know Who Lynx is.
I also see you do not have any idea about what you are talking about !!!

I hope you both share a happy future.

Is that a threat ?

Good morning Guys,

Let’s not make it personal, please

Is that a threat ?
Hi mjlk, I don't think so, but...
I hope you both share a happy future
- that was just sarcastically [i][b]rude [/b][/i]remark. We know when such tactics is used in order to end the conversation (which was actually carried out in normal and civilized manner)

Sure, axl can think that those users here in this forum, who are agreeing and all authors out there, who are explaining potential danger of real-time email scanning are spreading FUD.
Definitely it is very easy to find a lot of technical/scientific descriptions (old and more contemporary) of this common problem and that does not apply to OE only (moreover OE is organized the way where the recovery could be easier and not everything can be lost. The result is usually worse for those e-mail clients having one file as storage)…
Nothing can stop axl from using real-time email scanning and that that’s personal choice after all.

“onAccess”, “onExecution” scans, behavioural blocking, other layers of protection, etc. is sufficient enough for me and others, regarding email scanning/checking actions and stopping what currently is possible to stop when something malicious was suspected.

Finally, my remark to the original poster – Petit - was made only because of my opinion that not having real-time email scanning feature cannot be the reason for naming the the Suite differently to the name given by Comodo.
Whether it could be named differently by Comodo developers or because of users opinions – would be a separate discussion.

Please let’s return back to the main topic here

My regards

SiberLynx you went off topic with regard to the OP. :P0l

@SiberLynx and mjlk: stay on topic. Notice, I refrain from asking politely, I didn’t say please stay on topic…