CPF Wishlist Rev 3

Just wondering, how you would want so much security for browser implemented problems when you claim this…

<<
The Dragon Rocks !!!

Re: Which Product to develop next? 

« Reply #39 on: Yesterday at 10:04:03 am »


I must agree with DoomScythe on the post of no browser . Another browser would be fine but , I would much rather have the guys work on important matters . A new browser is not in my opinion . And , some of you are not thinking of all the possibilities . Maxthon , Avant , and so on which are shells but , something to play with . The Comodo guys working on a browser is the last thing I would ask of them . I PRAY they do not do it !!! Besides . I think the post is about security . There are plenty of options for safe browsers . >>

That leaves me wondering I suppose, you claim there are plent of options for safe browsers and said the post was about SECURITY, yet you want Comodo to implement browser securities into their FIREWALL? Just wondering where you separate the two, not slamming your post here or trying to be rude. ???

Thanks,

Paul

If you would have taken the time to read my prior post , you would see IE IS the most widely used . It is a major problem . THAT is where I draw the line . My goodness . What is it with people in here thinking referrer control is not needed ? This is a SERIOUS security issue . IE users need major help . A firewall should have a referrer control . Cookie control is an optional thing but , still very nice to have that option in the firewall itself . So , in answer to your question , since more people than not use IE , the firewall that one uses should have these features .

As stated above, there are free utilities to take care of this. A personal firewall is not a web filter. Maybe you miss Sygate too much.

Like many less fortunate people in this world of security , you have no clue either . Call it what you will . It IS a security issue . And Sygate ? I see you really are on the opposite end of the spectrum from me . Sygate was a joke .

Gee falkor, way to make friends and impress people! ::slight_smile:

Seriously, I don’t think insulting people is really going to make them see your point-of-view. Remember, just because someone doesn’t agree with you, doesn’t make them less fortunate or clueless. It just means they do not agree with you.

Personally, I liked your initial wish & I would have said so… if it wasn’t for the subsequent stuff you posted.

Im not opposed to the idea as a whole, I just think IF implemented it should be as a plug-in. I say this because I personally use software designed specifically for such issues. The software I use is more advanced than the implementation built into CPF would most likely be. As far as bloat goes, it’s really anything that takes up unnecessary space. If these features were built into CPF, it would serve no purpose to many people, as they already use other software for this which is much more thorough. There is a difference between system security and system anonymity, although some might find it to be a fine line, it is still there.

Gee , I am heartbroken .
I am not trying to make anyone see my point . I was called out . I responded . This is a wishlist . I gave mine . I do not care if you like it or not Kail . Nor do I care what you think of me . Pretty sad for you step in and start up . Good for you . Attack all you wish . Again , I asked for what this thread is about . Drop the personal attacks . And , for your information , I was told it would " in fact be bloat " . That is an untrue statement PERIOD . And to say such a thing in response to my wish was unnecessary .
FYI , I am glad we are not friends . I came in this thread to ask for things . And give insight . NOT to be attacked . And , I see where you are too in your own words . You would have said my idea was a good one IF it were not for the subsequent " stuff ". LOL . Too funny . Too many problems arise from such stupidity . You do not have to like someone to realize they MIGHT have a good idea or not . And , I was talked to in an unhelpful manner . Ask the forum for things you want . This thread is for that . I kindly ask you leave me alone . Many thanks and have a nice day .

AJohn .
plugin is basically the same thing in my mind . That is all I am asking for . And , again , like it or not , it is what I asked for . No need for us to argue . Ask for what you want please . Disagree and move on . Do not try to state fact when it is opinion . You do not want it in the firewall . Understood . I think Melih and company get the point . I am sure they will do what they think is in the best interest of the firewall and I feel secure in that .

Guys, Guys…
come on now…

we just have misunderstanding…
noone is attacking anyone…
lets keep it civil and nice…

We all have one thing in common… we all love Comodo (L)

Melih

 Trying to keep this civil, I assume just post what you wrote in your own words in hopes to allow you to see that you do the same that you are getting mad over....

<<< Another browser would be fine but , I would much rather have the guys work on important matters . A new browser is not in my opinion .

The Comodo guys working on a browser is the last thing I would ask of them . I PRAY they do not do it !!!

I think the post is about security . There are plenty of options for safe browsers .

I too was asked MY opinion in this thread and this is how you replied. I simply hope you see how you reply, and how you do in fact react to others ideas as well. Your “Quoted” reply above seems to go against the grain of what you wrote to me in the immediate above copy, and I did in fact read all your replies.
That said, there is no point in arguing this , we all have GOOD ideas in our own OPINONS and they should ALL be respected if agreed with or not. Yours , mine, and anyone elses.

Take care,

Paul

Sorry if I was rude :-\

I think a decent request would be for the product to support plug-ins in the way Outpost does. It would be great for things like this ;D

I posted this in another forum also, a GUI for home networks and gamers for simplification of connections, etc…Ok, what I was thinking was on a much more simple basis. Simply to allow other gamers\users or a pre-determined access prior to gaming at all. This would be more of a user to user type setup, like controlling your company I guess. This way, a person would be all set and ready without worrying about it. On many multi player games, if can allow the ip or port prior to the game , the game can find or you can enter it manually into the game and the game will then work through it. Once you know the game setup, it should be easy to configure and keep some settings and with a few clicks, you can open or close it when done, allow\disallow others. Some gamers shut the firewall right off not knowing how to allow others ip addys and such, this would be more of the type of situation I would mean. With the obvious game issues, if the user cannot connect when the game is running, create a log in a quiet mode that would show a possible problem. Access the log and read what the problem may be so the person can come here and ask for help or elsewhere or may know themselves what the problem is.

Paul

[attachment deleted by admin]

Comodo Personal Firewall has the potential to be the very best firewall available…period.

Here are some things I’d like to see improved:

  1. It consumes too much memory. I see 3 processes running (CPF.exe, CLPTray.exe and cmdagent.exe). CLPTray.exe is not necessary. cmdagent.exe appears to be the actual firewall and CPF.exe appears to be the user interface. I closed CPF.exe and CLPTray and the firewall still seems to work OK. I created a shortcut on my desktop to start CPF.exe which works fine, except when I close it, the CPF.exe process continues to run.

  2. On the startup menu and desktop separate the Launch Pad (CLPTray.exe) and Comodo Personal Firewall interface (CPF.exe) into 2 icons/shortcuts and allow the interface process to be closed when it is exited.

  3. Add an icon to the system tray that will show internet activity (like Zonealarm). This is meaningful information for most users.

  4. Using the 2.3.2.21 Beta on Windows 2000 SP4, it takes over a minute to shut down the system. This normally takes about 5 seconds. The last non_Beta version does not have this problem.

I would also like this feature

Hi, I would just like to comment on a couple of issues , first of all, Comodo should not be consuming that much resource. That is another problem on your pc then. Three processes, the acutal program, the system tray and updater, this is normal. Closing main executables is not a good way to go , some programs will still function but incorrectly . I used ZA for years and it consumed my resources somewhat and nearly ten minutes of start up time. Comodo does not consume a quarter of this and as suggested, there is other issues with your system. You may not have removed a previous firewall properly or have one running which should only be one. You may have conflicts with other programs like powerdesk , rc recovery commander, other anti-virus, etc…or I would suggest doing a thorough spyware\ virus scan as these can easily make a security software run overtime.

Paul

Its memory usage is a bit on the high side, but the next beta release (due next week, but this is flexible ;)) will use less resources. CPF.EXE and CMDAGENT.EXE ar the two components that make up the firewall, but both really should be running. CLPTRAY is simply the Launch Pad system tray app and is optional, but it means you have to set up alternative means of starting the apps.

2. On the startup menu and desktop separate the Launch Pad (CLPTray.exe) and Comodo Personal Firewall interface (CPF.exe) into 2 icons/shortcuts and allow the interface process to be closed when it is exited.

There is a lot of thought going into Launch Pad at Comodo, even as we speak. Stay tuned!

3. Add an icon to the system tray that will show internet activity (like Zonealarm). This is meaningful information for most users.

This is one of the most asked for additions to CPF. I think they will end up doing this, if only to shut us all up! :smiley:

4. Using the 2.3.2.21 Beta on Windows 2000 SP4, it takes over a minute to shut down the system. This normally takes about 5 seconds. The last non_Beta version does not have this problem.

This slowdown on shutdown occurs because CPF makes several additional security checks (on the system and on itself) as it is shutting down. The thinking was that it was better to lose time when the user was finished, rather than make them lose time waiting for the system to startup.

Have a look for the next beta when its released. I think you’ll be pleasantly suprised.

Hope this helps,
Ewen :slight_smile:

I agree with the thinking… :wink:

Edward

My fault, I thought the CMDAGENT kicked off the updater. :stuck_out_tongue:

Paul

It is nice that CPF notifies of such things as invisible applications, but something I would like to suggest is not only text notification, but some sort of graphical notification withen the popup. An example would be a small logo under the text notification, or possibly a colored outline around the popup.

Seems like a good idea to me

More wishes from me…

  1. copy to clipboard from the activity window, both connections and logs.

  2. When creating rules, can you please make the protocols selectable via check boxes, so that we can choose different combinations than what is currently available.

  3. please add, http, dcc, telnet, ftp, and dht protocols to the rule filter.

  4. add remote login attempts to the network monitor.

  5. add telnet login attempts to the network monitor.

cheers.