COMODO has serious challenge from Privatefirewall!

Let’s keep this thread on topic please guys…

So Comodo has a serious challenge because this particular firewall has a pretty GUI? :wink: Like you said… Private dosen’t even have support for x64… And look at all the products Comodo has compared to Private, Let alone user base. Not much of a challenge IMO. :slight_smile:

There is no way indeed you can compare “that Private thingie” to Comodo Firewall v3.14… and that was mentioned already

I am still using v3.14 as Kirrin and many other users, but with Defence+ being active on both win 7 x64 & XP x86


... all the products Comodo has compared to Private...
is absolutely irrelevant though in this context...

… rather see bug reports & disasters outcomes using those numerous products
So, if you are talking about “many” products by Comodo… I would say – the firewall (v3.14) itself will be even much better if there are much-much(!) less Comodo other products :wink:


I respectfully agree with you here. :slight_smile:

I’m still using 3.14 and that’s because I’m waiting for the auto-update (bone idle). ;D Still, I wouldn’t mind giving CIS 4 a whirl. The Matousec results impressed me and I wonder if 3.14 could reach that perfect score, not that I’m likely to need that level of protection. I just wonder. :slight_smile:

Me too Kail :wink: :-[ :cry: :-\ and how long do we have to wait any ideas, feedback otherwise it sound like never going to happen to update v3.14 to v4.0******.

I do sincerely appreciate this calm reply despite several point-of-views-differences we had (have & hopefully will not have many in the future :slight_smile: )

Who would not appreciate having a bone???.. What!!! forget it :slight_smile: I’m bad - you know that

Actually precisely the very same 3.14 did reach the perfect score.
No wonder for me! & that’s why that is the only one I will ever use

Waiting for what? :slight_smile:
Use 3.14 and you (we ) are fine.
There is nothing to wait for except the “permanent revolution”… Oh! Sorry !
I meant permanent changes to “ this sandbox” & deeper ruining the perfect Software (Firewall)

Cheers all !

Sorry, I haven’t heard anything at all on the CIS 3 to 4 auto-update process.

Ever? As in forever? That’s a very long time SiberLynx. :wink:

Actually, it does have support for both x86 and x64 on Windows 7 and Vista. That aside, It has one of the worst interfaces I have ever seen

[attachment deleted by admin]

Oh, Missed that - Somewhere else I read it did not have support for x64.

I will give Privatefirewall a try some time and see what it’s capable off…

Well, r u getting philosophical or what ?

I am not a religious person , but as we use to say - if Gd will give me a “very long time” - then Yes … or that will be another Firewall , but not the v4 [u]ever/u … here we go again… caught in a cycle ;D


It has been said that version 4 is easier to operate. And a lot of people say this isn’t true. But PrivateFirewall is easier and if you would admit that 70 percent of what comodo offers in defense most people will never need with normal web surfing. Mostly if you are smart and stay out of chat rooms and off porn sites and don’t open unknown e-mails and use a good browser like firefox and stay away from unknown third party sights you will not or should not have any problems. And of course you need to be smart and don’t put bank accounts and credit card information on your computer. Because no firewall will keep you safe against the best hacker who is determined to get your information. But 99.9 percent of people will never run ito those hackers. So a firewall that is easier to use but let say only 85 percent will be more than enough if you use the safety guide lines I pointed out here.And for all who don’t want to do the guide lines then if you get burn and probable sooner or later you will then I really can’t feel sorry for those people. It is like someone sleeping around and then complains about getting a disease well that is the price of doing something risky and it is the same when you don’t follow good computing habits. So no feeling sorry from here if you get your information stolen when if you were smart you wouldn’t have had it on your computer in the first place.

You have rationalized yourself into a fool’s security paradise. I say that because my 79 year old Dad who has been competently computing since the time before what we now know as the internet even existed and by habit follows much more stringent web use guidelines than you have outlined managed to collect a total of over 60 pieces of a variety of malware from downloading trojans to worms as shown on a scan I did recently on his PC. This is evidence that the current crop of malware writers are much smarter than the minimally protected (McGafee in this case) web user no matter how safe he thinks he is being because these days the ‘bad’ guys aren’t just in ‘bad’ places as you speculate anymore they are now everywhere they estimate that you and people who think like you do will be and because I run Comodo I know that they even hide their malware in banners on popular sites just waiting for those who underestimate their abilities to become frequent victims of their ingeniously crafted infections.


I agre with Maxxwire. Malware is not predominantly present in doggy places anymore. A while ago lot of websites were hacked by My SQL database injections and other malware was put in place that would jump on IE as soon as it visited these sites.

There are these things called condoms… Sorta similar to a good firewal… 88)

You are paranoid and that is sad. You be amaze just what can be called malware. For example I am sure you have heard of Spybot Search & Destroy and you might have heard of a anti-virus program called Avast. Well not to long ago I had Avast on my machine and after a regular definition update of Avast it read Spybot Search and Destroy as malware and deleted the file with only a notify that it had done so. See what I am tring to get at hear is that any program can be misread as malware. And after a week or sr Avast corrected there mistake and it didn’t show Spybot Search & Destroy as malware anymore. But the point I am making is a lot of so called malware are either unknown software to the data base or false positives. So if you believe every scanner then you might have ten or so programs on your computer. People here are so paranoid it is running ramped. I do believe most people here either need medical help or get off the internet all together. And your belief that any one or two or even a dozen software suites can 100 percent protect you make you foolish. I have a friend who has been working with computers for most of his life and with the safe guard I stated and a anti-virus program and Spybot Search & Destroy has little problems. Now yes once in awhile he does get a virus witch he finds and deals with. But all this talk of a virus or spyware everywhere is nothing but scare talk to boost programs like Comodo on people. You people are so way out there please get some help wont you I mean get a reality check wont you and stop trying to scare everyone to death.

PS. Condom doesn’t protect you from making babies 100 percent and a woman can only get pregnant 1 week a month. But a decease can be gotten 365 days a year. On the box or at the maker of the condoms they say because of what they are made of and heat and other factors there is a one to two percent failure rate to the best condom. And if you say then wear two one over the top of the other. Lets just say have you wore two raincoats at the same time. Meaning if you wore two condoms at the same time the man wouldn’t get any enjoyment out of it do to desensitize the man into no enjoyment at all. So go on your foolish way believing that your condoms will protect you 100 percent. You may only become a unwilling father or maybe something a lot worse. Just like thinking any firewall can protect you 100 percent foolish thinking both ways.

Hi MJR1,

But all this talk of a virus or spyware everywhere is nothing but scare talk to boost programs like Comodo on people. You people are so way out there please get some help wont you I mean get a reality check wont you and stop trying to scare everyone to death.

Few (many?) things were said already about your posts (& as I remember the thread(s) being even split)…

I may add lil comment re: the above quote.

1st – saying that people that are still carrying out / continuing conversation with you “”need help” ; “reality check”, etc. – is simply rude and inappropriate.

Then, who is “boosting programs like Comodo on people” & why that is by any means a “scare talk”?

Your talk/promotion of another (Private) firewall rather “boosting” … let’s leave aside what was already said – you cannot compare that one even to Comodo Firewall v2.4 concerning the strength (some people are still using it)

This is a free product.
You want it - you use it. Otherwise there is a simple way - just drop it silently and install whatever you are considering being better.

What’s the problem here?

I am using this Firewall (only) since the very beginning.
I do not use any other Comodo’s products that I tested …
I stopped at v3.14 and will never use v4… so what?
I am not saying that any user here or any Comodo’s staff “forcing/boosting/trying to scare me”.

If I would change this firewall to any other one I would still say thanks for several years of an excellent protection … that is as simple as that.

Speaking of protection and condoms


Who really scared me here was you! :smiley:

I tell you what - I am definitely using condom when having sex with “yet unknown” woman.

… at the same time, I would not even think about using/applying/whatever you call it … anything like “firewall” … down there - that is really frightening, man! … even if you call it “Condomo” instead of “Comodo”

… hmmm… probably the “Private” firewall would be more appropriate for protecting private parts after all ??? …. hmmm …. still such thoughts are giving me goose bumps

Cheers! ;D

I forget how simple we are here. I was trying to make a compare to if you think condoms will protect you 100 percent you are wrong like no firewall will protect you on the internet 100 percent. Your people on here think that comodo will protect them no matter what and I am saying that just like condoms firewalls will fail to protect you as well. The only real protection in both is smart thinking. One not to be sleeping around and two to web surf smartly witch sould be the number one line of defense not to rely to much on any one piece of software that will sooner or later let you down if you don’t web surf safely. Peoples IQ’S I think are falling they think that a piece of software will protect them just like they think a small piece of latex will protect them during sex. and really the only true protection is smart sex no sex with anyone outside of marriage and no web surfing to high risk web sights and thinking some firewall will protect them forever. That kind of thinking will get your computer ■■■■■■■ up.And yes people here are trying to scare people instead of telling people to web surf smartly they make people think there are viruses everywhere and comodo firewall will protect them. Just let you know I web surf a lot and comodo very rarely gives me any warning about any sight only remember one time and that means either there isn’t that many viruses out there as the people here think or Comodo AV doesn’t work all that well. And as far as the firewall goes I don’t know anyone who ever had someone really try to get into there computer so firewalls are pretty much for show and really don’t have a real useful purpose for the average computer user if they use a router and now days most do.

MJR1, nice. That’s gets you a 2 day post ban as a warning for several insulting remarks.

“Paranoia is an unfounded or exaggerated distrust of others, sometimes reaching delusional proportions.”


He is right tho but maybe he needs the change the way he says things. Not to sure about his dislike of comodo’s firewall but it’s true it will at one point or another let you down. (As all firewalls will which is why firwalls are updated for want of a better word to try and move the goalposts in your favour.) So sure surfing is one way of (trying) to keep safe but as someone else said you can get infected on safe sites as well. Hopefully that makes sense it did to me. :slight_smile:

Guys, you really should keep an open mind on these things. Don’t let a product become a quasi-religion ;D

I love what Comodo is trying to achieve, most definitely, however certain aspects are not thought out sufficiently from an average or even intermediate user perspective.

If you are an advanced techie and want to spend a lot of your life with your head in your PC, that’s great, that’s either your job or your hobby. You must know or want to know how to play with CIS and you can optimise it greatly. That is good news for your security.

I like IT as a hobby but do not have enough time to get my head completely into networking and security threat issues to allow me to adequately configure CIS for most scenarios for me. I use a laptop in lots of locations and need different rules for different locations and CIS is not easy to config, at least not for me.

Beyond that, there are now several tests mentioned on other threads such as the spyshelter tests where CIS does not work adequately on default settings and even on pro-active settings for some things. Sandbox is also not adequately dealing with these things. Sure enough, eventually they will be fixed, but even then some users have been waiting a long time for advanced svchost handling and nothing done so far.

I have in the past couple of days done these tests with PrivateFirewall 7.0 (PFW) and it on default settings whilst still in the training period it kicks in immediately and allow you to deny the exe and then it fully blocks it :P0l

That is unlike CIS either failing or giving more alerts that do not allow the exe to be contained and gives access to screenshots, microphone etc. PFW also has zones which are ideal for me. Yes I am potentially concerned that it does not score as high as CIS in Matsousec challenge for sure, but one issue I can see for those tests is that the firewalls are not tested according consistently - they are not all on their default setting, or not all on their max setting, but a mixture. That’s comparing apples and oranges, or worse.

I look forward to CIS fixing issues and improving the product for the non-advanced user and then I will test more to see if I can use it again with more confidence. In the meantime PFW is looking good :-\

By the way, also tested Online Armour and incredibly I was alerted to 2 unsigned device drivers! :o
It may be an error on their part, but that is inexcusable for a security company! I progressed no further with it and moved on to PFW instead.