Thanks for dropping in and addressing this issue. It’s always nice to see a concern addressed by a moderator. That being said, I do have some issues with your response, though.
“This has nothing to do with the fact that they are competitors. All it means is that Malwarebytes and SUPERAntiSpyware have updated since the last time they were whitelisted by hash.”
I have no idea how Comodo goes about creating their whitelists, and I have no idea what you meant by saying, “by hash,” but regardless, Malwarebytes and SUPERAntiSpyware are two extremely popular programs, especially Malwarebytes. Malwarebytes has millions of users, and it’s unfathomable to me that the developers in charge of Comodo System Utilities would not be able to keep the whitelist current for such an extremely popular program.
I have scores of services running on my computer, many of them very obscure, yet Comodo System Utilities is able to list them all as being clean, but strangely, it plays completely dumb when it comes to a very well respected program that’s used by millions (i.e., Malwarebytes). If the developers have the data to list all of my obscure services as clean, then they certainly should have the data for one of the most popular programs around. So, no disrespect to you personally, but your explanation offered in defense of Comodo simply doesn’t make sense to me. It’s a very weak excuse.
And furthermore, it gets worse: In my earlier post I reported that when I run the Autorun Manager module of the program, under Services, it says that the malware status of Malwarebytes and SUPERAntiSpyware is unknown, but I just played around with the program some more, and this time, I discovered that when I run the Autorun Manager, under Startup, it’s actually showing SUPERAntiSpyware as being infected! This is totally unacceptable.
I don’t know if there’s any truth to the suspicions that I have about Comodo doing this on purpose to make people have doubts about some of their competitor’s products, but if that isn’t true, then the only other explanation is that the developers are asleep at the wheel. Either way, the situation isn’t good, and it makes Comodo look very bad.
“If you would like them to be trusted by hash, which is what CSU does, you should submit them in this topic.”
Hmm, I’m not really sure why that would be my job to do so. The Comodo developers get paid to make sure the programs work right, do they not? They should already be on this, not me.
Edit: removed unnecessary bold in your post. It is considered shouting and therefor considered as rude. Eric