Hahahaha!
I give up… :P0l
oh! I didnt think in that way. Youre right. Thanks for reply.
I take a look (again) at this topic and now I bleave that I can understand better… Im suspicious about the user who created this topic. Time to do some research about it…
oh, btw… today is another day that CIS7 protects me (and my family, and my friends, and my coworkers, and my clients)…
I am really glad with cis 7 final but I have to ask something: please consider to make an “step-by-step” configuration wizard after install of cis. This is the thing that is missing for cis7 to be the real deal for everyone who dont trust in it yet…
EDIT.: Just created the wishlist topic https://forums.comodo.com/wishlist-cis/wizard-guide-after-installation-for-cis-t103611.0.html
I am glad we protected you once again.
our Containment technology is the only desktop containment technology and its for free and it works!
thank you for your wishlist, we always take our user’s wishes into consideration.
thanks for your reply. I really hope You take in consideration what ive asked in this wishlist request. Atleast take a look and discuss with the devs.
getestet (PDF) http://www.av-comparatives.org
Link changed by Moderator only home page links allowed
Direct link removed please read terms and conditions of av-comparatives no direct links allowed
Test setup The test device is a Lenovo ThinkPad Twist running a fully up-to-date Microsoft Windows 7 Professional SP1 64-bit. The base image, without any third-party security software, is configured to allow file sharing and Remote Desktop access in private networks, but not public ones. This means that in a private network, i.e. defined as “Home” or “Work” in Windows Network and Sharing Center(WNSC), it is possible to do the following: · Ping the test PC using both its hostname and IP address, with both IPv4 and IPv6; · Access a shared folder, using both the hostname and IPv4 address, then open, edit and save a document in it; · Remotely control the test PC via Remote Desktop, using the hostname, IPv4 address and IPv6 address.However, if the network type is set to Public in WNSC, all the forms of access noted above are blocked by Windows Firewall.
Test procedure for each product The test PC is connected to the WLAN/Internet using a connection that is defined as Work in WNSC. The test version of each product, available as at 13th January 2014, is installed using default settings, and the test PC restarted. If the product itself prompts the user to define the current network type, the Private/Trusted option is chosen. If the product has an update function, this is run. We check to see that the product has registered in Windows Action Center as the system firewall, and that both Action Center and the product itself show it as working properly. From a second PC, we then check for connectivity in the existing private network as follows: Ping hostname -4 Ping hostname -6 Ping IPv4 address Ping IPv6 address File share hostname File share IPv4 address Remote Desktop (RDP) hostname Remote Desktop (RDP) IPv4 address Remote Desktop (RDP) IPv6 address
When I observe this report, the question is the testing products list do not have COMODO CIS 6.3
Tested products The products included in this test report are: · Agnitum Outpost Pro 9.0 · AhnLab V3 Internet Security 8.0 · avast! Internet Security 2014 · AVG Internet Security 2014 · Bitdefender Internet Security 2014 · BullGuard Internet Security 14.0 · Emsisoft Online Armor 7.0 · eScan Internet Security 14.0 · ESET Smart Security 7.0 · Kaspersky Internet Security 2014 · McAfee Internet Security 2014 · Microsoft Windows 7 SP1 · Symantec Norton Internet Security 2014 · ThreatTrack VIPRE Internet Security 2014 · Zone Alarm Free Firewall 12.0
How come the page show COMODO on the final result list in this page?
http://www.chip.de/artikel/Firewall-Test-Kostenlose-und-kostenpflichtige-Tools-fuer-Windows_32878576.html
Please also note quote from any av-comparatives report is not allowed.
I would like to add to the question here why Chip doesn’t state anything about how they came to their conclusion about the Comodo Firewall; i.e. how they tested.
The test done by AV-C is working from the perspective Windows Remote Desktop is enabled.
They will reasonably expect that if they define the network as public when prompted, that their computers will be secured against intrusion by other users in the public network. Business users who use a laptop as their one and only work computer may find themselves in a similar situation, with the additional possibility that their machines may have been configured to allow remote control using Microsoft’s Remote Desktop.Moderator Panic stated:
I don’t have the time to test CIS in the AV-C scenario but with Remote Dekstop disabled the user will be safe.
Remote access via teamviewer on windows 8.1 computer from a friend, the parties were blank dialogues he did when we did the test and do not expose it. (see attachments):
Comodo firewall and private firewall I’ve reported here that fails to recognize the teamviwer as an Safe software. Set in custom mode, configuring teamviewer output only, Comodo will fail.
Both comodo firewall, private firewall will only block the remote connection track block TCP / UDP [1024-65535]
My suggestion: Comodo should come with standard doors on global rules, usually used by Instant messengers, email clients, web browsers, FTP clients, etc… Done this add default rules in the development of the program to ask requests output that come from external IPs to the User Machine.
[attachment deleted by admin]
There is not much development going in “Firewall”, there are more and more improvements in the rest of Comodo. Perhaps this is what people here are implying.
comodo firewall is the best free firewall software ever & it will be more stronger in the near future but what comodo needs to really improve is the web & url filtering & antiphising component
Why do you update virus definitions without waiting for the author to give you all necessary informations?
Why do you not implement a function which allows “bypass programs and hackers” to notify you first?
Because meanhwile comodo is safe by definition.
If you say, the test report does not exist, other companies reacted to the results.
And found reasons to do so.
This is the third time I will state this:
AV-C did not test Comodo Firewall as can be seen in their report. Chip added comments about Comodo where they did not state that and how they tested.
I personally do not use any tests as a guide, they have way to many inconsistencies IMO.
How many times have we read when a patient has passed all tests showing a clean bill of health, only to get a second opinion saying you have a terminal illness with only a short time to live. 
Although the chip.de website doesn’t say how they tested Comodo Firewall, we can safely assume that they tested it just like AVC tested the other Firewalls with default configuration to keep all the results accurate with the AVC reports. What I don’t understand is, why no one here can verify if the chip.de test results are the same with there OWN CUSTOM configuration.
The default configuration is setup for very basic protection, and even has the “Don’t display pop-ups” checked by default, which would explain why it scored so low. If someone here can take there own custom configuration, and do these tests themselves, we can then have a offical answer on how secure Comodo Firewall actually is compared to the other firewalls.
Its COMODO’s job to perform the tests on there own firewall to make sure it actually is the best free firewall compared to the others. They should perform the same tests that AVC did on the other Firewalls. Its not asking much for COMODO to see if these results are actually true, regardless if it doesn’t offically say how chip.de tested, since you can safely assume it was a default configuration.
Besides that, I can say with confidence, that with a custom configuration, COMODO Firewall does a way better job then the standard Windows Firewall. If this isn’t true, I will be shocked beyond belief, considering all the claims from various sites boasting COMODO Firewall as the best FREE firewall.
Well I thought “Fine I’ll test it” but… I can’t ping my laptop even when everything is set to allow it… not even with the firewalls on both computers disabled! I have no idea what’s going on here but it messes with the whole test so I can’t get a reliable result.
Besides my laptop is really slow and a pain to work with so I can’t be bothered with troubleshooting this…
The catch with the AV-C test is that Windows Remote Desktop needs to be enabled in Windows 7 according to this Technet article and is also disabled by default on Windows 8 according to this article and others. (Also see my reply further up).
According to the AV-C test RD may be enabled with business users. That makes the problem non existent for people with default Windows settings where Remote Desktop is disabled.
However, there is a point in the test where it addresses firewall usability settings and how it behaves when changing wireless networks. There is a risk factor when having RD enabled which is typical for business machines and not regular user machines.
Most of us here probably have Remote Desktop disabled, so for the most part, the Remote Desktop results are null. I can also assume most of us have File Sharing disabled. I’m guessing they mean File and Printer Sharing, which us savvy people have uninstalled or disabled. So both the Remote Desktop and File Sharing results are ignorable.
The only one that’s left is Ping, which ironically, CIS7 just added some nice ICMPv4 and ICMPv6 options for. So if the Ping tests were based upon ICMP, then we should be perfectly fine (if you know how to set up your firewall properly). I personally have ICMPv4 and ICMPv6 blocking IN and OUT. I have no use for ICMP. I also have IPv6 disabled. So I’m sure with my configuration, I would get a +++ for Ping test.
So to sum up this test, I would say that what needs to be done is a more strict default configuration. Because, you will have shady reviewers do a unfair benchmark of the software without properly setting it up. I doubt ANY Comodo Firewall user uses the default configuration.
I personally tweak COMODO Firewall to the limit. I bet if you used a proper configuration, COMODO Firewall would be on top. When you install COMODO Firewall, the wizard should ask you questions like, “Are you a Novice or Advanced user?”, “Would you like to block ALL incoming traffic?”, “Do you have any use for Pings and ICMP?”, and so on.
I know its nice to cater to new users and make the firewall easy to use. Most people don’t like being nagged about there programs needing to go out to the internet. There are some of us, like me, who do like notifications, and like to see everything that goes IN and OUT of the machine. I get stressed when I don’t see pop ups for my programs. I make custom rules for all of them. For those who don’t there must be a better default configuration that will not leave new users so exposed, and shady reviewers something to talk down on.
So to sum up this test, I would say that what needs to be done is a more strict default configuration … I doubt ANY Comodo Firewall user uses the default configuration.
i would prefer that every user understand why and how to do and (they are all different with different need and different hardware and living in different place) be explained better what is the difference between their own choices (maybe with something visual like a light or a number ) : the default configuration is right _ users need and ask to be involved with intelligence in the rules and to be the owner of their tool which a firewall (comodo here).
Agreed, @Merke. 
Kind regards, REBOL.
@MorphOS REBOL
kind regards, merke 