Question about the development of CPF V3

From what I have heard in this forum about CPF V3, it is going to be a phenomenal product. A leakproof firewall with both HIPS and Sandboxing. That’s a rock solid concept there. Add a good antivirus and that’s really all you need.

My biggest concern is that it could force the user to use an “all comodo” security suite. I know that it is being designed to integrate well with CAVS, but is it also being developed with the idea in mind that people may want to use other secuirty products as well?

Presently, I use CPF, NOD32, and Spysweeper. This combo works well and all the programs appear to be compatible with each other. But once you add HIPS and Sanboxing, compatibility gets a little more complicated. So is Comodo developing the product with compatibility in mind? The last thing I want is to be forced to choose “all Comodo” or “no comodo”. Ultimately, if CPF ends up being the product that I think it will be, I will probably run CPF V3 and NOD32 and nothing else (so long as these 2 products continue to play nice with each other).

I posted this 4 days ago, it has been read 74 times, and not one reply? Of course, this is not a presing issue. But it would be nice to hear from someone.

I use NOD32 too, and it works really good with Comodo Firewall.
Comodo doesn’t make any of their products to just work with their own brand.
They seriously try to make their products work together with other programs from other company’s.
Since Comodo aim to make CFW 3 the most competent firewall in the market, with some innovative functions, you probably wont need so many security products… :wink: ;D

well, we would rather get users to use our products than force them!
Its not our company policy.


I am with you there. In fact, I am hoping that when CPF 3 comes out, all I will need is that plus NOD32. But if it starts conflicting with NOD, its off my machine. NOD32 is the centerpiece of my security suiite.

Once cavs2 is up and running properly i truly believe that it will surpass any other av on the market. Melih and the Comodo team have built the best FW (and that is only going to get better) so I can’t see them developing an av that is going to be 2nd best, it will be the best. I personally don’t have a problem with using a suite from Comodo because the support you get from the team is second to none.

I read in this post that CPF is going to have hips and sandbox. I thought that the hips was being developed in the CAVS2.
Could you give us the correct info. As Fonzie said “I so confused” LOL
(B) (R)


In general, I don’t agree with this line of thinking. Most companies do one thing very well. But it’s a rare bird that does everything well. I use webroot spysweeper as it is an excellent product. But I don’t use Webroot’s firewall or antivirus. That’s also the reason that I tend to stray away from “security suites” as you usually get short changed in one area or another. Just because a company can develop a world class firewall does not mean that they can develop a world class antivirus.

So before CAVS ever makes it onto my system, it will need to win a VB100 award. It will need to light on system resources. It will have to give me some advantage over the AV that I presently use (other than being free). I don’t choose my security products by price. Even if CPF was not free, it would still be on my machine because I consider it to be best in class. When Comodo proves that their AV is best in class, then it will be on my machine too. But don’t assume that because a company can develop opne excellent product that every product they develop will be excellent. That usually just isn’t the case in the world of computer software.

you just found your “rare bird” solo :wink: Security belongs to Comodo!
Just watch me!


[quote author=Melih link=topic=3704.msg28800#msg28800 date=1163078656]
you just found your “rare bird” solo :wink: Security belongs to Comodo!
Just watch me!


Trust me, you do have my attention and I am watching! I would love to see you accomplish your mission. If I could have a world class security suite all by one vendor, that would be SO convenient. To have it also be free would be icing on the cake.

I’m pulling for you Melih!

So that’s why i got ignored, lol. Comodo already plans on integrating a sandbox in the firewall. Why did nobody say that? (:SHY)
I just hope it’s at least as eficient as Sandbox/GeSWall. I will more than accept initial bugs and few holes, since it will be the first time. CPF for ever!

well, we hope that it will be one of the best in the market place!
the guys who did the firewall are so into HIPS and they know their stuff! They are building a really hot HIPS (full HIPS) into CPF :slight_smile:


Every day the thought crosses my mind that the product could have:

  1. All the benfits of the current CPF firewall
  2. Full HIPS as good as say Safety Sysem Monitor (SSM)
  3. Sanbox Application along the order of Sanboxie or Greenborder

That would be one amazing piece of software and ultra secure. It would be a layered defense system all in one package (just add antivirus).

Heh, heh, he :slight_smile: (:NRD)

exactly our plan :slight_smile: sshhhh… don’t tell anyone (:KWL)


New implementations are great, no doubt. I do have one concern though. CPF as it stands is darn near the ultimate firewall, passing leak tests, runs great, boots quickly, isn’t letting anything through to my knowledge. Now, I do think HIPS being thrown in is a good security, no doubt. My concern is that too much into an already great firewall eventually, is going to effect performance, protection from the firewall itself, etc…While HIPS is becoming a standard, will people let their guard down on the firewall assuming HIPS will be there to back them up? Any time things get added to a security software, the software suffers at the security level, this is known. So will HIPS be a hindrance to CPF or simply help it out? Does this firewall need HIPS? How about a separate HIPS program ? It would\could contain BO protection, HIPS, popup blocking, anti-spyware and all those protections that people want in the firewall and CAV, without effecting the firewall or CAV, leaving them to do their specific jobs. It could be the ultimate “security side suite” from Comodo.


My guess is that some people will stick with the current version as it is stable and provides rock solid protection without hogging resources. Many a great application have been ruined by becoming “bloat ware”. But if I were a betting man, I bet that Comodo will make the firewall so that you do not have to use the HIPS or the Sandbox if you don’t want. I bet they will give you the option to turn those features off, or at least some of them. That’s the way that I would do it (if I knew how).

Hi Solo, i’m with you on that. Still, how many people are looking for all these extras, asking Comodo for this and that? What about a spyware , HIPS, and all that in a separate program? Why put it into something that is darn near perfect already? I just feel that after using CPF religiously , and with the exception of the OLE troubles, I am a bit troubled with new implementations into a near perfect product. I think more should go into the user control of CPF , not the security aspect and that it should be easier for many others to configure. While many of us don’t have problems configuring it, many new users do which is obvious with all the questions. I am not saying it won’t work, but is a concern. I may be a moderator but I am still a CPF user and I like it for what it is, a ■■■■ good firewall but hope new security changes, implementations don’t effect it and I know the team is great about looking forward on this but by adding, something must be sacrificed, or it will become bloatware, no? I guess if it starts here with new additions, what’s to stop it from becoming more and more eventually?


With all of these added features, it very well could become bloatware. We will see. That thought has been lingering in the back of my mind. But I can definitely understand why they want to add to the firewall. I personally believe that HIPS and Firewall should be in the same product. It just makes sense. HIPS is like a process firewall, then you’ve got your traditional firewall. Might as well have them in the same application. Not to mention, if Comodo is successful with this, people won’t need other security programs and Comodo will become synonymous with security. But it is a huge undertaking. It wuldn’t surprise me to see V3 take much longer to develop than orignally expected. Making HIPS user friendly for the average computer user is no small task. But Mike Nash did it with Online Armor. Comodo can do it too.

Finally, nothing says you must upgrade. I know many people that still use Kerio V 2.1.5 Firewall because it was stable, light on resources, and worked well. If you really like CPF V2 (like many do), just don’t upgrade.

I am anxious plus a little bit nervous about V3. Of course, I probably won’t install it on my system until well after the first release and all the bugs have been worked out.

Well you make a good point but unfortunately with security software, you either upgrade or get left behind with an outdated security. I guess another way to put this is simply, MANY programs now have hips, like spyware terminator, Online armor, and not to mention many others will have this. I honestly think almost any anti spyware application will have this and wonder why CPF would really need it. I use spyware terminator right now with HIPS and I see no reason to have it in my firewall. Of course the concern about not getting along with other HIPS apps is real, although Melih stated it should be fine so I will take his word for it and I haven’t used two HIPS apps together yet. Of course like you stated, if it’s able to be turned off, that would be a different story then. Anyway, thanks for the reply, very good conversation here. :wink:


All I want is that the developers implements a few more suggestions, already on the whish list, and try to improve the performance and stability before starts to think on the v3.0…

And only have features for a Firewall!