Running Antivirus thinking you will be safe......Madness!!!

General Category Melih's Corner - CEO Talk/Discussions/Blog
41
...But what about the people who use AV's and don't ever get infected in over a decade of computer usage? They do exist, and in great numbers.
Hi Dch48, As you noticed (I hope ) I do agree with you on many points & the same time it happens that I do not... ;)

Please don’t get it wrong , but you are repeating this message over & over again including “safe use of MS Internet Explorer”

My answer to you – you are just don’t do “stuff” &/or not testing malware out there. Period!
That is your own safe style of using PC & the Internet as a whole.

… but if you would go “step left / step right” from that pattern you (as anyone) here – is a Goner!!! Big Time!

Neither Comodo with its “Deny” policy nor any other security will help …

Please get a “special” PC ; be adventurousness and Go ahead! Try please. You will be infested with infections in no time, believe me.

The Defense + is not an entity of the Firewall anyway.
Nobody can rely on it. Not many people do understand its messages and despite many requests to improve on that – Comodo developers did nothing - they just ignoring that

Instead they introduced weak ( softly speaking) “not-a-sandbox”, which is just a “Software colander” - any serious infection will escape. It creates problems only and false sense of security with all the subsequent dangers

Please do not post the advices like: “You can make v4 work as the latest v3 with just a few tweaks”… enough of that!
Nobody needs tweaks and most of the users do not understand the essence of those those “tweaks”.
Many (how many? - just read) disabling it - but that is not an answer.

How about AV users who paid a lot of $$ and still get infected? how about them? Were they protected by what they paid for?
Sure not ! You are right here … but you are wrong with the way you are going. You will get less protection soon and users will find the set of free security layers that will be better than Comodo whole Suite. Comodo's AV never was and never will be the one... anyway as you said the AV (any) is not an answer ... & this one was developed just because of an "alleged" convenience of having the Suite ... that is not working solution as I can see it

The only strong hold here is still the latest Firewall v3.14… well and even v2… hehe! :slight_smile: without Defense+

I'm fully aware that I'm not as safe without a HIPS but I'm willing to take the chance seeing that I am one of those people who has never gotten infected.
You are the one! :) but Comopdo's HIPS is not an answer … neither the “not-a-sandbox” The Behavioural Blocker … probably... if that on will not be integrated (God forbid!) I am happy with Mamutu currently … there are other details but mainly we are talking about “Free range” products...
1. They got lucky..
True!
...I do not think there is or will exist in future a internet security suite that does not interact with the user
[u]very True as well[/u]
Is Comodo Internet Security the way to Protection against Zero Day Attacks?
The answer is strongest No!.... sorry

Cheers!

42

hi SiberLynx

If you can show us which malware will jump out of our sandbox, we will be more than happy to fix it.

thanks
Melih

43

I’m not about to purposely go to infested sites and purposely test malware. I only have this one machine and can’t afford another one right now. At the same time, I don’t stay away from things unless told to by IE8 through the smart screen filter, Avast! through it’s web shield and network shields, or even sometimes by the Comodo DNS. I’m sure that I could be infected by testing out the newest malware that is not recognized yet by scanners but I have no desire whatsoever to find out.
I do agree with you about the sandbox though. I can’t say it lets malware jump out since I haven’t had any but I can say that it lets things in it still make permanent changes to the system. It sandboxed part of the Steam updating process but the updates were still successfully applied. It also sandboxed the part of the game Team Fortress 2 that connects to the servers but it was still able to make connections to the Internet. It is like a colander but it filters too much and does not work as advertised. The main thing I don’t like about it is that it’s automatic. I realize this is the intent but I just don’t like it because it causes more usability problems for me than it eliminates.

44

I think you could achieve a very good protection with some products.
The use of the safer browser you can achieve (with addons to increase security), a firewall, an antivirus/antimalware and HIPS you can have it.
The antivirus alone can’t give you all the protection. But it is a must have item in the list imho.

45

I feel pretty safe right now with my current setup. I would probably be safer with D+ enabled but I can’t deal with it any more. Avast! has shields that protect from almost everything and does a pretty good job of blocking new threats as well. They have promised to make that even better by improving the Behavior Shield module. I guess I’m one of those who prefer the default allow approach. It just makes things so much smoother and enjoyable.

46

What did happen?

47

Yep in todays world just an AV is definitely not enough.

I think we need to start supporting Linux more, LOL… :slight_smile:

I LOVE Linux :slight_smile:

48

I used to only browse the internet in a virtual machine running Linux to be safe, but I no longer feel a need to have to use Linux…thanks to sandbox technology. That could not have been said just 2 years ago. Thanks to Comodo and few other progs. too.

49

sick of all the global bs; and trying to pretend America is supposed to be borderless; and under International Laws; when Its NOT supposed to be. The internet; is crawling with every borderless company also preying on everyone; how do we stop all that???hmmm?

50

But we have to be honest and say that a local behavioural blocking would be nice addition to the Default Deny strategy used by COMODO. I also agree that if you think Avira, Avast, AVG, etc. can protect you - you’re mad. These companies are using methods, which may have been effective 10 years ago, but now we need something new to be protected.

51

This will be included in a future release. Can’t say which one, but it has been planned for a while.

52

Having cleaned a lot of infected pc , I can affirm that probability to receive an infection depends upon skills of the user and their preference when they surf. A lot of them entered in site that should be avoided entering Comodo DNS or using a serivce like K9. In the past security companies leaved HIPS product, but now they’re coming back. In any case, I know people who didn’t have a threat even if they have only a traditional free AV based on signature; other who had cashes even if they have installed more sofisticated suites…
Business could be segmented on the base of human foolishnesh that we can label as “propensity to tisk” ; ;D

53

In addition to my previous post, I invite you to perform a statistical analys (if nevere done): You’ll discover that a lot of people believe that the only way to download a virus, trojan, etc. in inerne is surfing sites witn pornograpy contents…
Maybe is useful to study victimology :wink:

54

OMG!!! IM TALKING WITH THE CEO OF COMODO!!! OMGWTFBBQ!

55

OMG!!! I’M TALKING TO LINUX731!!!
WKWTFTM!!!

Geeze Louise! It doesn’t take much to float your boat, does it? :smiley:

56

Rawr calm down.

57

I was only kidding. No offense was intended.

58

Ok we cool.

59

We trust that an AV will at least try (to the best of the company’s ability) to keep their users safe. :wink:

Same with Comodo, avast!, Panda, etc. I guess all those crazy losers that are running Comodo thinking it will keep them safe (oh look, trust is popping up here too), so there isn’t any point running an AV?

60

Usability is a point to keep an AV. It will help to reduce the amount of alerts CIS will give.