Layered Security - Why this is the only way forward!?

[Info-Sec]

V3 of the firewall is indeed good. I think (from what ive seen from the beta) will be a turnoff though. There are A LOT more pop ups (though the computer scan solves most of them) and I think the V3 was geared more towards a professional because some of the option’s descriptions are quite cryptic to a novice.

[Opus_Dei]

I agree with Melih on some pints but also with info-sec on the issue about bundling

1. from Melih’s Quote at the bottom
   “Security: If the security products are talking to each other (usually different vendors’ products don’t) then you can create a more secure system as each product will be helping the other product if they find security issues.”
   Does this mean in the end all comodo Security produts will have an optional Security console?
   Are there still plans to construct a network managment console for CFP?
   Will this include optional management for other security products?

@Info-Sec post:17

Well with the best of breed BSODs, its important that you make sure all of the best of breed dosnt have tag alongs. For example, spy sweeper; a prominent antispyware can come bundled with its antivirus. It is important to disable (or not install) the antivirus if at all possible to avoid that instability.

I have tried many combinations of best of breed, and still havnt BSODed : /

I hope the user will always have the option to install components individual without the installing the suite or the console

Thanks (J)

OD

@Melih post:18

BSOD aside, there are many other areas, where having best of breed from one vendor is beneficial

1)Performance: There are many repeated components amongst many security software
2)Security: If the security products are talking to eachother (usually different vendors’ products don’t) then you can create a more secure system as each product will be helping the other product if they find security issues.
3)Resource Usage: as 1 Resource usage could be optimized.
4)Usability: rather than running many apps, with different logic to learn, one will do it for you.

etc etc

we can continue all day long as this is very subjective issue, however, my opinion is: Best of Breed from responsible provider who uses the ability to work together to the user’s advantage by making it more secure, perform better, use less resource and make it easy to use, is better than having discreet components.

thanks
Melih

[Dennis2]

@Info-Sec post:21

V3 of the firewall is indeed good. I think (from what ive seen from the beta) will be a turnoff though. There are A LOT more pop ups (though the computer scan solves most of them) and I think the V3 was geared more towards a professional because some of the option’s descriptions are quite cryptic to a novice.

When you test something and if you want to do it properly you test it to its extreme limits to see if it breaks this I believed is what Comodo is doing, when CPF V3 moves to Release Candidate and Final I think there will be a lot less pop ups unless you want them.
Or you can release the product and fixed the problems when they appear like a lot of others do. (OS?)
Dennis

[gibran]

@Opus Dei post:22

Does this mean in the end all comodo Security produts will have an optional Security console?
Are there still plans to construct a network managment console for CFP?
Will this include optional management for other security products?

hope the user will always have the option to install components individual without the installing the suite or the console

That was a long topic ;D

@Melih post:41

…snip…

Here are my suggestion:

Internet Security suite: lets call it Comodo Security Center (CSC) (he he) has the following Features:

1)User can install individual components (just want firewall… you just get firewall)
2)User can install different components and manage them from CSC (hence removing the hassle of jumping from app to app) So you get the best of both worlds, if you just want the app you just get that, if you have multiple app from Comodo, you have a much more efficient system (without comprimising security)
…snip…

Anyway every new version will bring more and more surprises
Let us Wait and See

Anyway once the architecture backbone is done the GUI is only a marginal part like the surfaced part of an iceberg.
Once Vista SP1 will be out maybe there will be a greater chance for cross-brand integration as there will be a new security-app-aware API.

[Info-Sec]

@Dennis2 post:23

When you test something and if you want to do it properly you test it to its extreme limits to see if it breaks this I believed is what Comodo is doing, when CPF V3 moves to Release Candidate and Final I think there will be a lot less pop ups unless you want them.
Or you can release the product and fixed the problems when they appear like a lot of others do. (OS?)
Dennis

As the performance is fine, im simply stating the faults in the UI, which I think might confuse novice users.

[twipley]

@gibran post:13

Knowledge is another priceless security layer

Mitnick was saying something like:
“the lowest security link in a system is the user’s curiosity”

[system]

Layered Security is the only way to go, preferably a user could have ALL security software from one vendor, but that is not always possible, years ago i used a certain firewall and it performed well, so i tried that company’s anti spyware software, the anti spyware put my pc into a crawl and every task was slow and arduous.
i am personally wary of so called “bundled” / “all in one” software as usually some parts work ok while others fail, to get all security software and have it run well together is a challenge for the user and a challenge for the developer, if ONE single developer had an “all in one” that ran flawlessly on my pc, i would snatch it up with no questions asked, i know if Comodo developed an All In One Security Suite i would try it