I saw the new test and Comodo was 1st and Zonealarm 2nd.
I see that Comodo firewall passes the most leak test against any other firewall that is great :BNC
But i read that Zonealarm has a better security system built in that Comodo could someone pls explain wat features Zonealarn has to make it a better security?
I was thinking that Comodo could have a feature that Zonealarm has that makes Zonealarm have better security?
also i read that Comodo does not block malaware as good. it would be good then for comodo to do something about the malaware
BTW i saw the review from a link in this forum.
Well, I don’t think that is true, but I haven’t tested ZoneAlarm for a year or so, so I should shut up
What test are you refering to? Would be nice to have a link so we can check it up.
The next version (Comodo Firewall Pro V3 - due next year) will incorporate a full HIPS protection layer that will prevent malware entering a system. This has been partially introduced in the latest beta of Comodo AntiVirus and Spyware, and CAVS HIPS and CFP’s HIPS (when its released) will work together to provide what I believe will be a very, very effective security perimeter for your PC.
Patience, grasshoppers, patience.
It is important to understand the testing methodology they use. The paper, design of an ideal firewall, incudes some features that really are not a firewall’s task. For example, token privilege escellation, or inter process activity monitoring etc. A HIPS however should handle all such threats.
A firewall, including CPF, is not an anti-malware solution. As we discussed many times, CPF does monitor these things but does not intercept unless it results in a network connection attempt to prevent more accurate connection profiling. Because a firewall is only interested in network connections but nothing else.
I believe those guys think from a HIPS perspective while determining the security architecture.
Nonetheless, for today’s DESKTOP users, such a distinction is hardly tolerable. According to our users’ feedback, they seem to have a tendency to think a firewall as an anti-walware solution. Keeping such feedback in the mind, we have rearchitected CPF 3 with a powerful HIPS. This makes our task easier indeed. Because believe me when I say intercepting critical activity and asking for users’ approval is very very easier than analyzing it and raising in case of a network connection(like current CPF does).
Anyway, according to the analysis on that site, CPF is the best of those 5 firewalls reviewed. Note that CPF has a version number 2.x while the nearest competitor has 6.xxx.
Gotta agree Egemen. I find it funny that a lot of people say they dont want an integrated internet security suite, but they really would like a firewall that does everything. And the difference would be …?
Anti-malware usually belongs to the duties of a anti-virus program. I think the cpf should allow users to opt for turning on or off this function at their wish since some users would like to use anti-virus solution of another vendor before a stable release of C.O.M.O.D.O. CAV is out. Could this prevent the possible software conflict of the alike security applications?