Having used Comodo Firewall for a few days I have been impressed, but I think I have now found a major disadvantage - although hopefully someone will reassure me otherwise.
I have 2 users on my computer, and today for the first time since using CPF I switched user. I was astounded when , once the second user’s window opened, I got a message to say that User A is using CPF and since 2 users cannot use CPF at the same time User A would either have to log off or close CPF so that user B could use it. Presumably if this does not happen user B is unprotected.
Surely a Firewall should protect the system not an individual user. I never had this happen with Sygate which I used before. Logging off is a much more long winded process than switching user, and it means that all open programs are closed and have to be restarted when switching back - not exactly user friendly!
Is there any way round this, or is it posible to have 2 installations of CPF on the same computer, one for each user?
Currently when using fast-user switching, although it appears CPF is not protecting another user the computer is still protected, but you will not see popups from CPF (see egemen’s post below). This will be implemented by Comodo in a future release.
You can log off each user off before logging onto another account if you wish to stop these messages.
When you say ‘future release’ do you mean this problem is actively being worked on, or is it some intention for the dim and distant future?
I think to be on the safe side I will uninstall CPF and return to Sygate for the time being. I cannot be sure that my daughter will remember to log me off if she switches to her set up, which means she will be working unprotected.
I will monitor this forum and consider coming back to CPF when this issue is resolved.
Meanwhile the strap line “My computer is fully secured by Comodo” may need to be modified - it could fall foul of the Trade Descriptions act - currently only the user is protected, not the computer!
It is not important if you don’t have multiple accounts on the computer. If more than one person use the computer then it can be a great help because you can leave the programs work in the background while the other person uses the pc.
Technically it’s a bit of a kludge that can break a lot more programs than CPF. One would expect major apps from big companies to be able to cope with it, but older programs and shareware may have trouble because they have probably never been tested with it.
It shouldn’t be an issue, should it? Doesn’t fast switching simply introduce a O/S level WAIT condition for the app? Wouldn’t that apply to all apps running under its control? I don’t know this for fact, I’m just asking?
Instead is a great issue. A lot of programs respond strange with fast switch on, on the other hand other programs don’t have any problem at all. It is a similar question with the hibernate feature. Some programs like it and some not.