Hi Solo, welcome. Let me start by saying that if your text is NOT shown, you didn’t let out information. The PC Flank was one that I became a bit flustered with and i’ll tell you why. It bases itself from communicating with IE through OLE automation. This means applications that use\modify a document and use IE to communicate with their server\maker. My problem with this is most firewalls would have to prevent OLE which is integrated into Windows to begin with. Now, you can block OLEs from access but you would have to disable OLE in order to stop it from happening. Some good apps use this method as they don’t have their own means of connecting to a server etc…They may even change when denied at a later time if the program changes etc…That said, PC Flank is misleading in my opinion and I have hashed this before. It doesn’t mean anything failed. If you ALLOW IE to connect with the OLE application in question, then it’s a no brainer that the OLE will get through. So, if you denied the test from PC Flank and you see no text, it didn’t get through, if you see your text, then it did.
Paul…Thanks for that reply. It is a little bit over my head as I am really not very technical when it comes to computers and software. But it sounds like I have nothing to worry about even if my text did get through (which it did). Sounds like PC Flank has created an unfair or misleading test. Unless I hear differently from you, I’m not gonna worry about it.
Hi. From the link you gave me, it didn’t show any text so perhaps a screen shot is needed. Either way, if you allow it with any firewall, you are allowing the OLE to get through which is going to show your text. If you deny it, which I deny many OLEs you shouldn’t see any text. Another note, they keep the previous text according to IP and many get fooled as they use the same one and say, darn, it’s still getting through, so please use a different text each time. To try and simplify, a program is modifying (let’s say) IE and using it to connect to it’s server, when it’s modified, CPF picks up on this and alerts you. Depending on the application, if it’s spyware, you obviously don’t want to allow it. Now, PC flank uses this type of method to connect to the server with your text, so if you ALLOW it, it is getting permission to go through which claims it failed. Now, if a firewall didn’t alert you and it went through on it’s own, then it would be a fail for sure. If you deny it, it shouldn’t go through so don’t be fooled into letting it connect to the internet.
hope this helps more.
I copied and pasted below my results. The last time I took this test, I was usung Zone Alarm Free and it also “failed”. The results from Sept 22 (today) are with Comodo installed. I also included a screen shot of PC Flank telling me I failed.
Regardless, I am not too worried. Just wanted you guys to see what i did.
PC Flank Leaktest Results
Welcome to PCFlank Leaktest results page
Here are the results of PCFlank’s Leaktest for your firewall.
If you see the text you typed in the table your firewall flunked the test.
If your text is not shown, you either didn’t take the test, your previous IP address was different from your current one or your firewall successfully prevented the leak of data (i.e. passed this leak test).
IP Date Text
184.108.40.206 Sep 22, 2006 20:11:05 GMT For Paul -9-22-06
220.127.116.11 Sep 22, 2006 19:12:12 GMT Comodo
18.104.22.168 Sep 22, 2006 18:44:49 GMT biged
22.214.171.124 May 22, 2006 19:40:12 GMT GMP
126.96.36.199 May 15, 2006 14:43:57 GMT gmp
188.8.131.52 May 15, 2006 13:36:53 GMT gmp
184.108.40.206 May 15, 2006 12:36:46 GMT gmp
I couldn’t open the .doc, I don’t have MS word. Either way, as Egemen stated as well, don’t worry, lol. Simply put, if you< refuse> it from Comodo, it shouldn’t show then. As long as CPF pops up asking if you should allow or not allow, you can deny, you are fine.
I had trouble passing 3 of the the Wallbreaker leak test which I feel is similar to PC Flank. This is what egemen told me to do and it worked. As always back up your registry before making any changes.
Please do the following:
1- Delete HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\Software\Comodo\Personal Firewall\AppCtrl\IPC key
2- Restart your PC
3- Open IE and restest.
Thank you for this piece of advice. As I do not know how to back up my registry, I am hoping that I can confirm from one of the board OPS that the above would be a wise move. I am always very cautious when making registry changes. One mess up can have big repercussions.
You don’t hve to back the entire registry just right click the particular key and “export” to another folder. Be sure to remember where you put it. This saves a "copy’ of the key you are deleting. If something goes wrong then right click on the saved copy and select “Merge”. It will be put back into your registry.
But I don’t blame you, in fact I would rather egemen look at this first and determine if it will work for PC Flank as it did for Wallbreaker before you try it.
Hi Solo, I had one question, did you deny PCFlank or no? Another note, the reason behind being tough to backup the registry I believe, was that CPF protects it which makes sense. I myself (my opinion only) would rather it be covered and set my own settings if needed but understand that some would want to back up thier settings as well.
I have a “guess” here. Online Armor would have to be allowed through CPF correct? So basically, other tests, etc…will tunnel through OA and bypass CPF. This makes perfect sense. In a way it’s a conflict of a sort as OA is basically a firewall and no 2 firewalls should be run. I would suspect to truly try Comodo, disable OA uninstall\reinstall CPF and let it be the ONLY one running. I would then bet that CPF will detect PCflank. Since OA is what is detecting and is the main program, it will decide what to do leaving CPF behind.
I would wonder what they use to disable the OLE in windows since this is what has to be done. Stopping communication between a program and IE is what needs to be done to properly succeed this. The problem? Some decent programs need this as they don’t have their own way to check their server so use OLE to do so. By denying all OLEs many programs may not be able to communicate with their server\maker. I can disable OLE automation right now and get that box, the problem? I have a few programs that use this and need it to communicate. As long as a program communicates with IE, it’s considered failed. IE is part of Windows, not web based, OLE is part of windows by default. Either way, I believe PCflank is misleading but that’s my opinion. Thanks for the info.