What is this? (The Shield Firewall 5.0)

The only problem I have with this is that Comodo really should have insisted on a visually different GUI, so as to completely differentiate CFP from their licensed product.

Ewen :slight_smile:

That’s a darn good price for a life time subscription. Plus they give free technical support, great for people that have a hard time describing their problem, or a business that needs support NOW as opposed to posting on a forum.

The funny bit is that the price is $19.99 and they say within the “Firewall comparison chart” that their firewall “Cost under $20”.

Horrified, it is clear that you derive pleasure from Psng ppl off… where I come from they would refer to you as ■■■■■■.
I recommend to anyone to make sure that no small animals are within your range.
Get some sleep and go out tomorrow and enjoy the sunshine.
It seems that at some point you were misinformed; some clarification:



If I remember correctly, there was some limits placed on Freedom of Speech, such as shouting fire in a theater…
This dude’s sole purpose appears to be the “Best Pest That He Can Possibly Be…”

Oh, I’m sorry. I didn’t realize this was the panicky, schoolgirls, name-calling thread…Going to check back later when all are acting their ages. Misinformation Melih? What are you six?

This is not a nice or proper way to refer to someone, Horrified. Please consider your manner.


To the “loyal Comodo fans”:

Please, close your eyes, take a deep breath… NOW GET A GRIP! (:NRD)

Kaspersky sold the Kaspersky 6 engine solely under their own brand.
When they developed the K7 engine, they sold the rights to the K6 to F-Secure, G-Data, etc.

Comodo developed the CFP v3 engine and gave it to you FIRST for FREE.

Later they decided to allow another vendor to license it, something that Comodo gave away for free from the very beginning, and now the poor, loyal Comodo users feel cheated, ripped off, “misinformed”
So very sad…

Kaspersky sold v6 and generated revenue, then licensed it out…
Comodo has never sold ANY version of CFP, so they have NEVER generated any revenue, but now all you poor, loyal CFP users are in a hissy-fit over who Comodo decided to license their product to…

What difference does it make who Comodo gives it to SECOND; COMODO GAVE IT TO YOU FIRST! FREE!!


axl, i’m sure most of us wouldn’t be worried/care if they didn’t have such a ROUGE history (:WIN) Personally i have no problem with Comodo wanting to make money (though i could see better ways then selling their firewall). Since isn’t the point of having a business? Or i may be wrong?

To whoever is spamming in big blue letters all over Horrifieds’ post, it is having the exact opposite effect to that which you’re aiming for.
It would be far more effective to reply to his posts, and refute the points he has raised.

Also, define ‘helpful’.

I have not seen any compelling evidence presented in this thread so far to indicate that they have such a history.

IMO giving him even more attention would be less effective, as his “points” aren’t worth the time and effort necessary to refute.

Waste of time and posts all that happens is it descents into the ridiculous.

Hi Horrified :slight_smile:

Can you provide us with the links of the posts you have made on the forums of the other vendors involved, just to prove us that you are not Comodofobic :wink:

Greetz, Red.

Ok, in order to give you the benefit of the doubt, I have re-read “page 1 of this thread”.

I saw a single reference and link to some site called spywarewarrior.com in one post, and I saw a quote apparently from the same site in another post.
Essentially this means that there is ONLY ONE SOURCE TO BACK UP YOUR CLAIMS.
So let’s take a closer look at this source, shall we?

  1. First of all, this is the first time I have ever heard about Spyware Warrior, but maybe I need to get out more, so let’s take a look at the Spyware Warrior’s front page:
    Seems they won an award from PC Magazine as one of the top 100 sites of 2005.
    The last line on the front page is “© 2003-2006 Spyware Warrior”.

  2. Let’s take a closer look at the specific page referenced:
    Third line on the page: “Last Updated: May 4, 2007”.
    Hmmmm… A page one month shy of a year old… Hmmm…

  3. Let’s take a closer look at the specific item referenced and quoted, Privacy Defender:
    Last line in item: “[A: 6-26-04 / U: 9-7-05]”
    Hmmm… an item added over three years ago, and updated almost two-and-a-half years ago… Hmmm…

Given the above, I found something else on this last page of interest:
De-Listed Applications
Some applications that were originally included in this list of “rogue/suspect” anti-spyware programs have been de-listed after the vendors for those programs took steps to correct the problems identified on this page. For each program that has been de-listed there is a note explaining the circumstances at the bottom of the main “rogue/suspect” list. For more information on the process of de-listing application, see THIS discussion below.

Sorry horrified.
Given the above, forgive me if your argument and “evidence” still leaves me yawning.


I have to agree with axl - Comodo licensing CFP is little different than what Kapersky does, and there is one site that (while trusted) is uncorroberated and pretty out of date at this point.

As to CFP not being free - sure it is. personalfirewall.comodo.com still offeres it for free. Now,
The Shield Firewall 5.0 is not free, but it is technically a different product even if it is basically a licensed CFP.

Now, I doubt I’d recommend someone use The Shield Firewall 5.0, but Comodo isn’t advertising anything here, and they certainly aren’t misleading anyone. Neither is the other company. And they do also have a McAffee and BBB logo…

As Melih said, PCSecurityShield has a legal license agreement with Comodo (as we do with many other companies) and the product plus service that we offer are legitimate.

Ragwing already posted on Lavasoft and he was corrected by them too.

PCSecurityShield is a 5 year old internet marketing company that rebrands top quality software products under the PCSecurityShield name brand. Any negative posts you see regarding us relate back to a 3 year old post on Spywarewarrior which they will not review or update as we have requested. Site Advisor (McAfee SiteAdvisor Software – Website Safety Ratings and Secure Search) has told us that even through they have downloaded and tested our software 21 times (check their site) and found NO issues, they still will not correct our “rating” until SpywareWarrior does. ALL negative posts about PCSecurityShield relate to those two websites.

I have made this offer on other forums, anyone who would like to test our software, I will provide them free copies under the agreement that they will post the results on this forum and SiteAdvisor. You can contact me through PCSecurityShield.

We do sell The Shield Firewall for $19.99 and that is our right to do so as we provide free technical support to our customers. While we do not work with AVG, they license their FREE engine to many companies that sell that product.

I appreciate Comodo letting me know about this forum post and allowing me to post a response.

Thank you,

Arthur Frischman

Thanks for that Arthur! We appreciate you taking the time to address our users directly.


Merhaba Melih bey,
Ne yapmaya karar verdiğinizi ingilizcesi benim gibi iyi olmayanlar için de açıklar mısınız? Bu konu önce Doctus’ta açılmıştı sonra da buraya taşındı.

Ne yapacağınızı söylerseniz sevinirim çünkü merak ediyoruz.

Thank you to both of you.

I think now all is clear.
Thanks to Arthur and Melih