Inconsistent CIS5 security status

Sorry but i just don’t understand the Comodo philosophy. I’ve ranted about this ages ago and in CIS5 it’s the same old thing. How can it be all green and saying all systems are active when they are not!?
Antivirus part is disabled, yet it’s conviencing me that all is enabled with a huge green shield.
This is just wrong. Shield should be yellow in this case and if i’d disable ALL three (antivirus, Defense+ and Firewall), the shield should become red. All security softwares in the world do it this way, just Comodo is doing it on it’s own in a very strange and useless way. I think it’s really time to fix this.

In fact i can disable all 3 main features in Comodo, rendering it useless against all threats and it will keep on saying that all is fine with a green shield. If not anything, changed state would warn you to re-enable everything in case if you’ve disabled certain parts for testing.
Just take avast! 5 as an example and you’ll have the most perfect example you can have.


+1 :-TU


I agree with you, but I think I understand Comodo’s thinking (although I don’t agree with it).

In the example shown in your screenshot, the user has disabled the AV, therefore the system is running “as the user intended”.

If the AV system fails to initialize, then that icon changes to a yellow or a red, indicating that there is a problem or a non-reactive state that has not been induced by the user.

Shaky logic and I don’t agree with it, but I believe this is what they were drivng at. If so, I’d revoke their license. :wink:

The logic should be what the user is expecting not what the system chooses to report.

Ewen :slight_smile:

Well if that’s what user is expecting, then they should do it properly like avast! Software has done it in avast! 5. It will warn you if any inconsistency is detected other than default recommended settings. But if user intentionally wants to run it that way, he/she has to tick “Ignore” function for specific monitored part of the program in settings and AV will again report everything is fine even though it’s main shield is disabled. This is how something is done properly. But you can assume that by default. It’s just bad.
Because in this case user is aware of what he/she did, where in CIS’s case, Comodo assumes that by default and even if user didn’t want to disable it, it will still show as everything is fine.

LOL. If you’re looking for an argument, look elsewhere. :wink: :smiley:

I think the solution should be as a program I used a while ago, it was either Avast or Avira, but it allowed the following:

  1. It allows you to configure which modules it monitors.
  2. It will warn you if any of those modules are disabled.

So this gives a person the choice of how they want it to work rather than having to live with something.

I don’t find anything wrong in the way Comodo is displaying that. User choice is user choice and the resulting green light is normal, just normal. Avast is doing that wrong, it keeps displaying an error message on the tray icon until you tick the ignore button in the settings, which is fine so far, but it will also keep displaying a “real time shields off” in the main UI status bar which is completely ridiculous.. That’s a minor issue, very minor, I’m an Avast user myself and I don’t intend to bash anyone here :wink:

Their logic… but no. The good will be the configurability: the user can set what should be monitored. Like RejZoR, I think avast 5 does a good balance between configurability and visual warning. Although, it could be improved as some parts of avast aren’t monitored unfortunately (like the self defense module).

you may kill me , but I like it this way , I have enough headache from windows security center , why would i like to have a " double headache" then ?

besides , we do have a little red , yellow and green which is enough to indicate the status of the specific part of the suite :slight_smile:

And yes I know , the majority of you guys think just the opposite , but think about it ! it’s you " and only you " who will disable any of those components , so there is no need to tell ya " despite the little green , yellow and red indicators "that you did so !!

However , since everybody here loves it "in the opposite way " , I have no problem if it alerts me when I disable any of those security layers :slight_smile:

To sum up , that doesn’t concern me as much as the holes that’s been found and yet to be fixed !such as the .msi files flaw

It’s better to have double warnings than warnings that are contradicting each other…

which is exactly the case with Avast 5 >>> contradicting statuses, as mentioned in my last post.

Do not agree.:)I like comodo’s logic.What I don’t like is, that the icon in the tray does not change it’s color too.:slight_smile:

Erm, where again? I haven’t seen any contradicting alert. Everything is as it should be and also is. Unlike with Comodo which is insisting that everything is ok while Security Center is screaming that it’s not running.

look better, again, when you turn off a shield, and set it to be ignored in the general settings status bar options, the exclamation mark will disappear from the tray icon, the status bar in the UI will show “secured”, but the details of the status bar will show “real time shields (note the “s”) off”. I already posted about that on Avast forums a while ago, they said it was wanted that way 88)

The setting ignores ONLY Status Bar. The upper bar displaying overall security. The one that shows FIX button otherwise if not all is fine. So that’s pretty normal. Each subcategory under Status Bar are not included, so you can easily enable it back from there anytime. And this isn’t even improtant at all and i’m not even discussing avast! here.It’s what i want to be corrected in CIS. If anything isn’t ENABLED, i want to be reflected from the main BIGGEST status icon. Otherwise you just see the green and you think it’s fine unless you look under each of 3 separate providers. Is it so hard t make it yellow and red like suggested in the OP ?

okay never mind, you already stated that archives couldn’t be ignored in MSE so 88) we’re getting off topic, so I’ll leave it there.

What has MSE to do with anything in this thread?

I agree with RejZoR. Please stay on topic.