Question about the development of CPF V3

cprtech · November 13, 2006, 6:52pm

comicfan2000 post:40:

Hi. The thing is, like me, I already use a HIPS program and it seems this is going to be a trend for almost every security software to have. My concern is more how it will get along with other programs that use HIPS. There are going to be HIPS programs falling like rain pretty soon and wonder if Comodo really needs to worry about it in their firewall. The pop ups don’t bother me however, others will or may not tolerate it or benefit. Why? Who is going to know what half the apps are trying to install or run? I know what happens when I install, I know what needs to be installed or not, many others don’t and will simply allow it all or have to question every pop up. I suppose looking at a majority that complain with CPF pop ups, let alone with HIPS too. I almost feel Comodo may need another terabyte for pop up questions after this. :o

Paul

All very good points Paul. Comodo doesn’t really have to go the HIPS route because, as you say, there are good, available HIPS apps on the market. I just feel if anyone is capable of successfuly integrating HIPS into their firewall, it is Comodo. No way would I feel this way about ZA, Sunbelt or Symantec - LOL! So on that thought, maybe they ought to just develop a separate HIPS rather than integrate into their stellar firewall??

system · November 13, 2006, 7:47pm

Nightmare scenario:

Anti-Hook:
Explorer.exe is trying to launch C-Hips. Do you want to allow that?
You:
OK -
Anti-Hook:
C-Hips is poaching in my waters. Do you want to allow that?
You:
OK -
C-Hips:
Anti-Hook is trying to allow me to poach in his waters. Do you want to allow that?
You:
OK -
Anti-Hook:
C-Hips is trying to allow me to allow him to poach in my waters. Do you want to allow that?
You:
OK -

Microsoft:
gotta go owwwww!

BSoD…

Paul Wynant
Moscow, Russia

Little_Mac · November 13, 2006, 7:53pm

ROFL!

AOwL · November 13, 2006, 11:11pm

LOL! ;D

Melih · November 14, 2006, 3:13am

hmmmm…
of course both products will talk to each other and share some common code.
there will be no duplication.
when CPF is installed, CAV will leave HIPS to CPF. When CPF is not installed CAV will do the application-centric HIPSing…

Melih

system · November 14, 2006, 4:46am

comicfan2000 post:37:

Mr. M 8), with the two versions of HIPS and such, have you thought at all about making a separate Comodo HIPS program at all? A separate protection download instead of making two different types with CAV and CPF? Or because some will only download one or the other or wouldn’t download a separate HIPS , do you want to keep it integrated because of that? Will there be an option to NOT use it, like a do not use box? Would you be likely to make something separate for those who may not use either security? Call it “C-HIPS?” With Comodo know how in security, could there be a spyware scanner, HIPS, or a few other things into this separate C-HIPS? I think that this would go over well, get some user votes and opinions into this new C-HIPS and see what they\we want and you are always looking for something to develop next, would this, could this become a reality? Just a thought as usual.

Paul out- (:KWL)

I have yet to create a question that merrits an answer.

m0ng0d · November 14, 2006, 1:09pm

Paul, I don’t think you need to worry… It has already been stated that it can be turned off if desired.

I’d like to think I won’t desire disabling it, but will save my definitive opinion for when it is developed and I am using it.

I am a past ZAISS user (so I think I have a good sense of pain), and I am not afraid of the path taken here with CPF. I think these things will merge to become the new standard in what a Firewall should be… but we will have to wait and see.

Not all change is bad. Sometimes molds need to be broken.

(V)

system · November 14, 2006, 7:24pm

2 ways to avoid discontent:
1- upon installation you’re asked if you want those new features
2- even if you choose to add the features (sandbox, hips) you can turn them off

(B)

Melih · November 14, 2006, 8:17pm

As I stated in my previous postings, we will give the user the option! Its all about empowering our users!

Melih

system · November 14, 2006, 8:53pm

Yes, i understood you lol. Sorry, i should have said it in another way. “How Comodo will avoid potential discontent”. (:TNG)

Cheers

Melih · November 14, 2006, 9:12pm

between what?

Melih

system · November 14, 2006, 9:33pm

“(…)potential discontent of existing users/ fans/ intelligent living creatures.” ;D

Melih · November 14, 2006, 9:39pm

oh that! lol

Melih

Rilla927 · December 8, 2006, 2:37pm

Melih,

I would like to make a suggestion. First off, I love Comodo the way it is.

I know everyone has different opinions of what they would like/dislike to be added to Comodo FW which is okay because if we all wanted the same thing “things would never evolve”.

By just disabling certain features that is not wanted is not the answer. I have ran into in the past where I have disabled a certain feature and then installed various apps after because that driver was still present on the system it still caused problems in the event of the app I was installing detected it and refused to install or installed and there were compatibility issues afterwards.

I think the best thing Comodo could do is offer a custom installation where people could de-select what they don’t want and install what they do want. All users would have the best of both worlds rather than having to make choices of not using the program at all. it would solve a lot of problems all in one shot.

Just a thought!

Rilla927

system · December 11, 2006, 4:21pm

Rilla927- read the above (:WIN)