Matousec Retest Results

Comodo and Online Armor with perfect scores. Cheers to them both. (R)

Who’s the boss ? COMODO ! :smiley:

Well done (R)

don’t forget that OA is a little team compare to comodo.

indeed, the comodo testing team found some failure with some test with the last OA build 119.
for the moment, i keep my mouth shutted.
but this matousec thing, cause i dont know how to qualify his activity, is giving again a wrong result on a certain exploit.
it’s not that i’m in war with OA and i’m not a comodo fanatic even if i use it, if i would find a bug, it would be the same for me, i would inform people about the error of matousec result in some test.

but we found something that shows some failure in the matousec result with OA.
and it’s very easy to find the problem, so how comes that it’s not mentionned anywhere on matousec site.
and how is it possible to get a 100% score as we can proove the inverse for the moment with one test.

so, if matousec doesnt correct this, i think we’ll have to clarify the situation and inform people about the bug founded that bypass OA with a test. we’re not here to do all we can to kill OA by any method we can find, but it’s more a problem with masoutec that we got here.

by the way congratulations to comodo coders about their reactivity to fix those two tests and get a 100% too.
but a serious test has to be done with comodo too. how can we be sure that comodo got really a 100% as we found an issue in OA.
we need people not from comodo team to test the firewall.
cause there will always someone to complain about the fact that we’re testing our frewall and as we’re fanatics our results will be discuted.
but i tested comodo and we were not agree with the keylogger result but comodo team members respected my opinion and results i posted are totaly impartial.
i joined first the testing team to test OA to show that it was as good as comodo but it was build 95 that suffered of little bugs so i had to admit that comodo was better at this time.
now i think a new test about both new builds has to be done and posted on
cause we dont trust matousec results for now.
sorry but it’s like that.
if nothing is done, i think customers must be informed.
it’s the second problem we have with matousec, but as OA build 112 was replaced by 119, it’s ok.
but it’s not OK cause there’s an error again.
one for the moment cause as free work is done, testers got others things to do.

ps : i wanted to congratulate MaratR for his great work in the comodo testing group.
yo ,u’re the man! :slight_smile: thanks for your help with my tests. i really appreciate to work with you.
not that i dont like others people, hé hé, in fact this team is cool as at the start, i had some tension in some posts about OA cause i was defending it as it needed to. anyway now i’m not for a firewall or an other, i just want to restore the truth about infos when it needs to.
and maybe if we can try to modify the relation that was not very cool between OA and comodo, it would be even better.
as paul comodo and mike nash are two persons that seem to be trully respectables and are upon all this useless fight that we sometimes start (me considered as comodo fan and others users considered as OA fans), the flames would not be hard to minimize.
mike informed OA forum users not to forget the first utility of OA forum. and flaming topics will be ended quick as it’s waste of time. the topic about was locked as it was anything but constructive discussion.
now we’ll see how things evolve.
i’ll begin with myself and my provocating posts.
but it’s not changing the fact that there’s something wrong with our conclusions and matousec conclusions about some result at the moment…

I think it is probably best to let this episode of “The Matousec Files” go to sleep…

Couldn’t agree more.

Everyone seems to have said their piece. Maybe Comodo and OA should focus on making their respective software as good as they can and let testing sites try and get as good as they should be. :wink:

Ewen :slight_smile:


Cangrats to Comodo & OA with perfect scores.


I’m surprised Comodo hasn’t yet bothered to put it on their CFP page, like they did with PCmag’s 5 star rating and other praise. :slight_smile:

I remember they did it a long time ago with CFP 2.4, “the only firewall that doesn’t leak” if I recall correctly. I agree with you, it would be nice to show such a great result, so people can even more confidently download, install and forget CFP 3.


deleted by me…