You’re about the 5th user to report this, with myself included.
You did know that rebooting isn’t necessary, didn’t you? Just open Task Manager and end explorer.exe. Then go to File > New Task (Run…) > enter explorer.exe (in some environments the .exe extension isn’t even needed when running known Windows commands). This is definitely a faster procedure because some programs are still running.
I don’t reboot anymore, the issue isn’t serious enough I think! Just restarting Explorer seems like a simple method, I havn’t tried it though.
/L
Thnx LittleMac tried that,sweet no problems. :SMLR
no problem, ness90; glad to help.
LM
Hi , I’m just new to COMODO. I just installed COMODO firewall the other day. I quite feel safe and confident surfing the internet. And I really thank COMODO for this. As I study the different function of this software, under Activity>>>Log, there is a lot and continues of traffic going on. And the description said Inbound Policy Violation, Access Denied(UDP or IGMP). Most of the source come from nbdgram and some are nbname. I just want to know if this thing is normal.. Hoping for any answer.
Thank you,
Jhun
nbdgram and nbname are caused by Windows peer-to-peer networking. It’s caused when a LAN workstation startsup and advertises its name and details across the LAN.
Providing you want to join the LAN, you 'll need to run the “add a trusted network” wizard (under SECURITY - TASKS). This will automatically create rules that allow LAN based comms to occur and your error messages will disappear.
Cheers,
Ewen 
I like to know whether i can uninstall comodo antivirus beta 2 properly?
Hi Ewen,
Believe it or not, It took me so long to look for my post message dated April 8, that is why I was not able to thank you or reply right away. I’m just knew using forums and it seems I’m lost.
Anyway, I thank you for answering my problem and I will do what you advice. Thanks again and God Bless.
Jhun
Jhun, every forum member can look for their own posts by click on the Show new replies to your posts. It’s underneath your profile at the top 
[attachment deleted by admin]
Hi LM, have a question, would Ivault and Verification engine do what < Trend Protect and SiteHound > do? I was told no but thought i’d check.
Thanks
Um, welcome to the forums comicfan2000 (:WAV)
i-Vault is a separate issue; completely different. It is a secure mechanism to store and quickly access logins and other similar information for use on the internet.
VE is designed to provide some fraud protection. It is, however, very different from TrendProtect and SiteHound. VE works by verifying the digital certificate/site registration relationship. Basically, it’s checking to see if indeed the site is who it says it is (with all the email scams trying to spoof a website, the scam can be exposed by showing that it’s not really a legit site). The site wouldn’t be able to fool it…
TrendProtect is somewhat of a safelist/blacklist approach, based on a rating system. A lot of anti-spam applications work this way. Based on words, format, etc, a score is created; if that score reaches a certain point, the spam (or in this case, website) is judged to be fraudulent, etc. While it might not be likely to miss bad stuff, it could possibly give false positives.
SiteHound works off of a blacklist of known questionable or bad sites. A lot of anti-spam filters use blacklists as well (as do any number of internet filters). If it’s only blacklisting, it’s likely to miss some, based on list updates being incomplete.
LM
Thanks LM. So basically for the purposes of Sitehound and Trendprotect, I would need one of those to accomplish these tasks. What about BO-Clean then? I guess what i’m getting at is, what of these would equal SH and TP? Or would any of them?
Thanks yet again
Well, in that (based on the websites) SH and TP have a primary job of telling you whether or not a website could be safe (ie, not fraudulent or dangerous in some way), but not stopping you from going there (still requires user interaction), the closest Comodo application would be VE.
I did not dig that deep into SH & TP to see if they provide any internet filtering (ie, of content, scripting, etc), but if so, that would seem to be more a function of the browser. At any rate, at present, Comodo does not have anything designed specifically to filter the internet.
BO Clean is an anti-malware application, designed to deal with malware in memory. No scanning, no filtering, etc. Just malware death & destruction…
Hope that helps,
LM
Anyone tried McAfee SiteAdvisor?
I gave it a try and it seems a bit less intrusive than VE - I think many would prefer the way this works to the large green border feature in VE.
:SMLR
hi Anderow
Ok, lets analyse this further… what does siteadvisor tell you and what does VE tell you?
Cos: Siteadvisor, afaik, tells you if there are any bad things on the site… whereas VE tells you that this site is Validated and authentic… so they offer two different things…
how would you like us to improve our indicator everytime you go to a legitimate site?
thanks
Melih
As I see it, the problem with “toning down” VE’s border to make it less intrusive (which you can do anyway; just decrease the thickness, change the color, etc) is that it becomes less noticeable. Thus, the user is less likely to pay attention to it, which defeats the purpose.
There are some websites that have (from Verisign, I think) a sizable balloon window that shows from the corner, with verification information. I actually kind of like that in preference to VE’s border notification. It’s kind of like Comodo’s TrustLogo balloon, but apparently doesn’t require a mouse-over; if it’s active on the site, it shows.
Hard to ignore, but perhaps less “intrusive.”
LM
I think an indicator that turns green or red (or blue for unknown) that is situated at the bottom right of the browser window would be better. It could say Comodo Verification Engine or similar. I love what VE does and admit it is superior to site advisor. However I think the large green border is too intrusive and detracts unnecessarily from the surfing experience.
Little Mac I think the look of the McAfee add-on is less intrusive without becoming easy to ignore. Most users would soon become aware of a smaller green or red box at the bottom of the browser and would learn to look at it when they browse to a new site.
Very rough screenshot attached: I think it would be better with the box colour changing but havent got time to colour it just now.
:SMLR
[attachment deleted by admin]
I think that personally I wouldn’t be very attentive to that; too subtle. Haven’t used McAfee Site Adviser, so I don’t know what it looks like in action, though.
Here’s the popup I was talking about. It’s just there for a few seconds. Granted this is only on https, but it’s the popup I’m referring to, not the process…
LM
[attachment deleted by admin]
I quite like that too LM, certainly an improvement on the huge green border.
Maybe a combination of the two: a popup that lasts a short time, similar to your screenshot, and also a small coloured VE ‘button’ near the bottom of the screen that stays ‘lit’ whilst the user is on a website. Perhasp clicking on the VE engine ‘button’ could re-open the pop up for more info if users want to double check?
:SMLR
What program is the popup used in? I tried VE but it didn’t work with Opera (my default browser). 