But Outpost you must to pay for have all the “supermegagreat functions” and Comodo is… FREE??
You musn’t forget it.
Of course and forgive me if it seems I don’t consider $$ vs free. I am just putting cost aside when comparing the two firewall’s core functionality. In no way am I minimizing what Comodo has to offer. It is an outstanding firewall. I just feel that from what I have seen from the latest Outpost RC3.1, it is a slightly better firewall - in my unbiased opinion. I have it installed on my primary h/drive and Comodo installed on a cloned drive, so the system configurations on both setups are equal during my comparisons.
To clarify, I am a nearly two year registered user of OP, but I wanted to trial Comodo because I was very intrigued by the Wilder’s forum hype it was getting. To put it bluntly, I have been amazed at what I have seen from Comodo, especially with regards to how thoroughly it monitors everything, including parent apps and system components.
Again, IMHO Comodo is just a few small steps behind Outpost RC3.1 in core functionality, and if you read some of my posts in this forum and Wilder’s you will see I am a huge proponent of Comodo, mainly because it offers system security as good as or better than many paid firewalls which is great for those on a tight budget.
In other words if it was the case that Outpost was light-years ahead then by all means get it. But if you don’t perceive it to be that way then why not settle for freeware? This is what any typical reviewer would say.
tell us those few small steps and it will be in the next version 
Melih
Actually, individuals should choose whatever suits their needs and comfort level.
Well Melih, I could give you a number of areas to look at such as streamlining rules creation, better logging, a better way to save rule configurations (there seems to be a number of individuals who don’t like the rules being kept in the registry), auto-blocking after a preset time, attack warnings, to name most of what I can come up with, and I believe the “wishlist” thread documents pretty much all of that, plus a whole lot of other great ideas contributed from other forum members.
But you know something, Comodo at least excels in the most important area that makes all of the above very secondary: system security. If Comodo had been developed with all of the above “features” in place but lacked the ability to so tightly control application network behaviour, as well as its supporting arsenal of defenses, I would never have spent so much time on it as I already have. All it really needs, imo, is a few upgrades here and there and it will be perfect 
Hey cprtech,
Thanks for this. We appreciate the time and effort you’ve taken in testing CPF, and also in the unbiased manner of your posts. To get a paying subscriber of a top firewall to say that we’re only a few small steps behind is no faint praise, now could you step aside as V2.4 runs past you please. LOL
Seriously though, your testing is appreciated and your additions to the wishlist are invaluable.
See you when 2.4 comes out!
ewen
Thank you panic! My praise of Comodo is sincere, and I will eagerly be there for further releases as well.
[b]2.4!
2.4!
2.4!
2.4!
2.4![/b]
;D
Anyway…
The moral of those emails; they simply had alot of goosebump experience with Comodo Personal Firewall name sprung from all over the place.
…this is bad for bussiness. What about all of our money we’ve put in this sh@`t years before???
Oh, man this is teri-bible!
But does renaming the leaktests work as the guy says, to bypass COMODO?? I sincerely hope that COMODO is not using the Name of the processes to block them )-:
I have heard this case on the COMODO forums where running a leaktest twice will result in problems or the second go failing the leaktest??
Although the post is severely biased, it does raise two very good questions.
cheers, rotty
give us some credit Rotty…
The reasons about why leaktests might cause issues: Cos they are not designed to be a production quality software, they are simply piece of code to circumvent some aspects of the firewalls.
Melih
I’ve tried that. And CPF catch the trafic.
I don’t know if he has another secret technic, but if what he do is what he said, then in my trial, it prove as a false report.
…just an example.
CPF sure know nothing about any local software from my country, developed in my country, with our newly developed scripting languange, and so on…
But when it goes online, it will need to bypassing CPF’s guards.
…just because CPF doesn’t know what it’s name of, should it bypassing CPF’s check?
Come on!
Wow, I think you laid out my exact feelings better then I could have. I too am a long time paid subscriber of Outpost with two current subscriptions. Unlike you I am less then impressed with Outpost 4 RC3 though. On first install I thought wow, they really got it right finally. Unfortunately after a day of so of running, issues started to crop up. This included occasional freezes, and something I have been struggling with in 3.51, extremely long boot times. And even though it is undoubtedly a good thing, the process monitor pop-ups just seem to be increasing and are tiring me out. I know they have a purpose but sense this is an area where Comodo is doing a better job of keeping me adequately protected with blissfully fewer warnings.
It seems to me that Outpost is really struggling, making this thread all the more interesting. Personally I would like to see them get back to focusing on the basics of making a rock-solid firewall with a few less bells, whistles and plugins. While the protection is very good, the bugs just seem to keep coming up and the delays have been long. Now that they have moved to release candidates progress does seem better. I really do hope for the best with Outpost as I think it is fantastic when working correctly. I have also found it is compatible with a wider variety of AV programs then many other firewalls.
I should mention that I don’t really agree with Melih posting the information that he did on the public forums. But… what the heck I enjoyed reading it and certainly understand the motivation for doing so. I also think that the owner of the “other forum” really flew off the handle and made a real ■■■■ of himself. The whole thing was very disappointing.
So this leaves me with Comodo, which I think has now clawed it’s way to the top of the heap. The three machines that I am using Comodo on have all run flawlessly with the last couple of versions. Day after day these machines continue to boot and run just as quickly as they would without any firewall at all. I have also not had any problems getting all of my other applications to work, while stopping all that I would expect to be stopped. I am not much into leak testing but am fairly confident I am getting cutting edge protection here too.
I do yearn for improvements in the areas that cprtech mentioned and am excited to see what the future will bring. In particular I feel that Comodo’s logging falls flat compared to Outpost. For me this is a big deal as I really like to have the ability to clearly see exactly what is going on. But given the speed of development I am content to just hang on and enjoy the ride! Kudos Comodo!!
Just a couple observations I would like to make or ask:
-
The problem with products like Outpost (of which I have limited experience) and ZoneAlarm is that the market for these products is starting to become very competive and is shrinking. Thus a lot of new features has to added to make them stand out. This leads to bloat and thus leads to very fat applications. This is why I like Comodo because I believe the focus is not (within reason) a market-oriented approach. At least thats my impression.
-
I like the Outpost plug-in architecture but I am not sure if thats a good thing. I’m not so sure I want a one app solution thats not focus.
3.PCFlank has a lot of space dedicated to Outpost. What’s up with that?
I’ve been wanting to get away from outpost for a while. In the 2 yrs I’ve used it, I haven’t been able to get them to fix almost any bug, no matter the debugs submitted to them. Its like they put a wall up to prevent fixing anything, you wouldn’t beleive what I’ve gone through and the idiocy they have told me in response to repeatedly submitted bugs, month after month, version after version. I want out bad, but I still think Comodo needs more work, like stuff in the wishlist to make it better before I go put it on the family cpu (a case of better the enemy we know than pissing off the folks with something new). :-\
Is there anything specific from the wishlist you want developed sooner than later?
as you will appreciate that wishlist is a working document and will always be there and keep adding and ticking stuff of it. So the wishlist will always be there!
Melih
From the Wishlist: replies #112 & #137
In addition to those:
-
Improvements to the logging interface.
-
A better way to save the ruleset and firewall configuration.
No hurries Melih. You have done so much already as it is. Your efforts have not gone unnoticed
(:CLP)
Hi Guys,
Detecting a leak attempt according to the filename is a cheat and can be only for deceiving the users. Ofcourse this is not what we do.
When you allow some leak tests, CPF will allow. If you block CPF will block. Especially when you allow DLL Injection type popups, CPF heuiristic analysis will not ask it again until you restart the PC. Or if you also remember the alert, CPF will whitelist it not bother you about the same attempt ever again.
Most people are confused about the PCFlank leak test because the test incorrectly reports failing. The pcflank site even stores your previous text, and it always show you what you typed before. So I cant imagine how ordinary users can be confused.
From the leak tests point of view, feel confident. I have been watching many forums, and am very happy to read CPF does catch some 0-day viruses despite users have top AV software installed. Have you heard any other firewall with such a success rate in that?
CPF does not just catch leak tests blindly. It performs significant behavior analysis and informs user clearly. IMHO, it is the best in this.
Yet, if you believe it fails, let us know and we will immediately fix if something is wrong. With CPF, you dont only have a good firewall, but some of the world’s best system programmers caring about your experience and feedback(On daily basis).
Egemen
That is the feeling I get
I hope that will shut anyone’s mouth from spreading false rumour.
Otherwise, they’ll have to prove it, as Egemen and team do; they prove it!
Well i don’t spread rumour, hence asking in the official forum. It is better to have these rumours sorted out then to let them continue. I shall post questions about any rumours i here about COMODO (-: so they can be blown out of the water so-to-speak.
cheers, rotty