Which Product to develop next?

While I fully agree we are all entitled to our views , a statement as

…<<The Comodo guys working on a browser is the last thing I would ask of them . I PRAY they do not do it !!! >>>

is a bit extreme. I am not asking anything of them, Comodo asks US, (and I did in no way imply a browser on a selfish level as to ASK THIS OF THEM), and we give our ideas. As far a Praying they don’t do this, I don’t think it would be that devistating to Comodo, not to mention just because it’s an idea, doesn’t mean Comodo is going to go for it, so this type of warning is a bit extreme I would think. Besides, the ideas are asked of us and the actual doing and worries would be on the part of the professionals at Comodo . I would assume they would be professional enough to know what they are getting into without warnings against other’s ideas. Also, if a browser is not important, then why do many flock to Firefox and cut down IE for the security holes? Just wondering.


I could definitely see some benefits from creating a browser, it could be an extremely powerful marketing tool if it can compete at the same level as Firefox and IE. I am not familiar with Opera in the least, I installed it once years ago and didn’t like it and haven’t touched it since.

At the same time, I can see some problems if it were created. With COMODO moving up the ranks in the security industry, any problem with a COMODO browser would be intensified due to the background of the company. I’m not saying that COMODO would create a browser that had problems, but we are all human and mistakes can be made. One serious issue could lead to some pretty nasty headlines and could be damaging to the other products.

What if this browser were developed specifically with SSL and e-commerce transactions in mind? Sort of like a secure-site only browser, with built in site verification and database of details on previously visited and verified sites, but not intended for general browsing.

What think?
Ewen :slight_smile:

Interesting, this would take away a lot of the risk involved. While Firefox is IMO, a superior browser to IE in many ways, most of the companies out there still use IE and are not considering a change. With something like this on the market, it could cause quite a shake-up IMO.

I think that would fly. And eventually move to greater things and perhaps for home users eventually. How about a parental browser? Only allows sites you want your child to go to . It could have a nice family feel or set a certain way for kids to customize it while feeling a certain freedom to browse. It could have a password protect to allow parents to find sites for kids to go on, and then lock them down to those specific urls by putting in a password again. Sort of like putting only certain sentences in a book. Just a thought as I would love that for my 8 year old. Other parental blockers don’t seem to work quite well. Just a thought.


I think that would be a great idea. This also goes quite well alongside Comodo being an SSL provider also, and with this browser, I’m sure it would bring more revenue for Comodo due to this.


ComicFan .
I , in no way , was implying your opinion is wrong . Noone is wrong here . Relax . My opinion , and that is all it is , is to work on things that can improve security first . I do not care if they do a browser or not . The reason I said I hoped they would not is there are more important issues at hand . Like securing the many browsers and shells that are already available !

 That's fine, and I wasn't losing sleep over it anyway, or mad, but feel the need to defend my opinion as would anyone and I am in fact , relaxed. 

But browser security is an issue in my opinion. In my opinion, I seem to be well rounded with my security except for my browser, which is still one big concern to me.
I have to ask why securing other browsers should be a priority at all, that should be up to the maker of the browser, shouldn’t it? I simply feel Comodo could do a far better job with a browser than anyone else. As far as anyone being concerned about bad press, comodo has had to defend itself on other products as well due to bad press. This is going to happen as long as other’s try to knock out competition, it’s just like mud slinging in an election although Comodo takes a truthful approach as opposed to resorting to bad press tactics as other companies have done. Like the attack on the Comodo trusttoolbar, but yet this is always a risk and it is defended.
Comodo is fighting the way up and will continue to do so .

Not saying they SHOULD or HAVE to create a browser either, but if we and Comodo all assumed to hope they don’t create something in fear of failure then I would think no one would be creating anything at all. I also wanted to add that given Comodo looks to generate revenue, this would be an excellent way to do so which may not involve security entirely and is for another thread but in my opinion would work well.


Just another hair brained idea by me…yes i am throwing another one out at you…

Since there are so many gamers that complain about being blocked, not being able to use a firewall, or don’t understand the settings, and for typical home users, how about something that may appeal to all of them? How about a firewall attachment or separate GUI that would allow home networks and gamers to use this interface to connect to eachother easier and safer. An interface that would allow them to see users on a network, choose ip addresses, allow certain usable ports manually or automatically by selecting one, a box that would show WHY they can’t in fact connect for a certain reason so they may sort it out. There could be a warning about opening a port or allowing users\ips, just so they can’t say they didn’t know, etc…It would go through the firewall and only be used for network and gaming priveleges. Just another idiotic thought but what the heck.


[attachment deleted by admin]

Hey Paul,

Not an idiotic idea at all, but there are several technical issues with full screen games.

If the pop up doesn’t make a sound, how does the user know its there?
If the popup does make an audible alert, what happens if we cant switch back to the desktop to respond?
If the alert doesn’t respond to a keystroke (ALT-A or ALT-B) to Allow or Block, and we can’t switch to the desktop, what do we do?
If the game’s running in a graphic mode different to the graphic mode the desktop’s running in, how can the firewall display the popup on top of the game?
If the game’s using SafeDisk 4.X CD protection, how do we allow for the randomly generated file that is created each time the game is run?

No knocking your idea, Paul, but there is a fair bit more to it than would first appear. The only thing I can think of is like a super-application rule, where a user could specify the executable that is used to start the game and then ANY child component (or grandchild component) or port access spawned from this executable (or any subsequently called component) would be allowed and recorded. The result of this activity recording could then be used to create a custom application rule for this game.

Sort of sandboxing a specific application, but only for access recognition purposes.

What do you think?

Ewen :slight_smile:

Actually , wow, you lost me. :o I isn’t az smartin’ az u iz! lol. :stuck_out_tongue:

Ok, what I was thinking was on a much more simple basis. Simply to allow other gamers\users or a pre-determined access prior to gaming at all. This would be more of a user to user type setup, like controlling your company I guess. This way, a person would be all set and ready without worrying about it. On many multi player games, if can allow the ip or port prior to the game , the game can find or you can enter it manually into the game and the game will then work through it. Once you know the game setup, it should be easy to configure and keep some settings and with a few clicks, you can open or close it when done, allow\disallow others. Some gamers shut the firewall right off not knowing how to allow others ip addys and such, this would be more of the type of situation I would mean. With the obvious game issues, if the user cannot connect when the game is running, create a log in a quiet mode that would show a possible problem. Access the log and read what the problem may be so the person can come here and ask for help or elsewhere or may know themselves what the problem is. Hope this makes more sense to you than it does me, loll.


GREAT IDEA! Really, really good idea, Paul - enable a different logging mode that captures all port requests but allow traffic from a given app. This “quiet” log could then be used to form an exact network monitor rule for the app.

You make far more sense than you give yourself credit for - sometimes we dont realize exactly how much we do know. :wink:

Can you PM Melih on this - its got real merit for gamers.

Ewen :slight_smile:

Thanks for the take on this. I can PM him, no problem.


I just wanted to say, I always laugh at your avatar every time I see it, it’s halarious! ;D


Sounds right on point to me

My views on the browser are varied, but just a personal vote: probably wouldn’t be an effecient thing for comodo to do.

I would use a browser that was made for safe shopping and paying bills at your bank’s site. It doesn’t have to be usable for normal webbrowsing. Just start it when you need it.
Comodo may sell some extra SSL cert’s, if they can show that they have a safe browser for the customers to use when shopping or paying bills…

I like that idea AOwl… you could even go further and not even call it a browser. Call it a Portal, or a Secure Portal or something like that.

Silly me… Comodo Portal! :wink:

Or maybe… Super Comodo Security Portal SP3 Ultra 2 Special (:CLP)