Matousec Results without the Leak-testing Penalty!!!

Because a lot of users ask about the serious bugs Matousec has found on comodo firewall and since Matousec claims that:
“We have finished the analysis and published a review of Comodo Personal Firewall 2.3.6.81. Except its great ability to fight leak-tests, Comodo does not have a good security design and the implementation is also quite poor and buggy. Nevertheless, its final score, also because of its excellent anti-leak protection, is better than the score of ZoneAlarm and thus it took the first place in our ranking. Visit the results page for more information.”
http://www.matousec.com/

I have decided to post here the same Matousec results by eliminating the Leak-testing results penalty from all the tested firewalls:

1st. Comodo
15656 - (9625 - 9350) = 15381

2nd. Zonealarm
16837 - (9625 - 8250) = 15462

3rd. Outpost
19517 - (9625 - 6675) = 16567

4th. Norton
36509 - (9625 - 4600) = 31484

5th. BlackICE
37491 - (9625 - 5750) = 33616

6th. Kerio
40588 - (9625 - 4825) = 35788

“Smaller values of overall ratings mean better products.”
http://www.matousec.com/projects/windows-personal-firewall-analysis/results.php
http://www.matousec.com/projects/windows-personal-firewall-analysis/methodology-reference.php#MIS00OAR

Did I miss something or the above statement of Matousec:
“Nevertheless, its final score, also because of its excellent anti-leak protection, is better than the score of ZoneAlarm and thus it took the first place in our ranking.”
is not correct?

From what I see from their results Comodo is better, even if we do not consider the leak-tests!!! (:NRD)

You’re right pandlouk… perhaps that should have read “Nevertheless, even if we ignore leak protection (which Comodo was better at anyway), Comodo’s final score is better than the score of ZoneAlarm and thus took the first place in our rankings.” ::slight_smile:

One more thing… “anti-leak protection”… shouldn’t that be “leak protection”? Isn’t anti-leak protection the opposite of what they mean?

Well, just looked at this and read some of the analases on the products (not all - the year’s nearly over!).
Seems to me that CFP is the ‘least bad’:

effect on performance could be reduced for some benefit

security is the big one, of course, but CFP isn’t as bad as the others. Let’s hope that the next version is better and that v3 is bomb-proof.

If Comodo gets security right this’ll be the best PF by a mile.

Peter.

the ideal firewall according matousec must have a HIPS functionality.
so wait for ver 3 :slight_smile: where we have some mean HIPS engine (:NRD)

but interesting to see Comodo is the best without the leak test results also, good work Pandlouk (:CLP)

Melih