Why is Comodo so vindictive?

[SpheresBEE]

I’m wondering why Comodo is so vindictive?

So here’s the scenario, and it’s been this way since at least v3x.

I install Comodo firewall (cis) off line, no Internet, for securities sake. I never connect until both a firewall and antivirus prg are installed. Then I set up some rules, but the most important one, in this case, is that I give comodo no access to the net whatsoever. Of course svchost is allowed access to my DNS servers. Then I connect to the net and what happens? No program can get through at all, so I finally allow comodo access, and it doesn’t phone home, to allow my using it, like it does if I’d given it access from the beginning. So why so vindictive. What’s done initially, during/at completion of install that can’t be done while us users watch?

I’m an original Internet user, from it’s inception, actually was on ARPANET before the Internet, and can only see that everyones fascination with background unmonitored phoning home can only be nefarious.

It would surely seem that you’re only in the business of your security, not ours.

Or am I way out in left field? I have several other issues that seem to point to the same conclusion, if you care to ask.

[Citizen_K]

@SpheresBEE post:1

I’m wondering why Comodo is so vindictive?

So here’s the scenario, and it’s been this way since at least v3x.

I install Comodo firewall (cis) off line, no Internet, for securities sake. I never connect until both a firewall and antivirus prg are installed. Then I set up some rules, but the most important one, in this case, is that I give comodo no access to the net whatsoever. Of course svchost is allowed access to my DNS servers. Then I connect to the net and what happens? No program can get through at all, so I finally allow comodo access, and it doesn’t phone home, to allow my using it, like it does if I’d given it access from the beginning. So why so vindictive. What’s done initially, during/at completion of install that can’t be done while us users watch?

I’m an original Internet user, from it’s inception, actually was on ARPANET before the Internet, and can only see that everyones fascination with background unmonitored phoning home can only be nefarious.

It would surely seem that you’re only in the business of your security, not ours.

Or am I way out in left field? I have several other issues that seem to point to the same conclusion, if you care to ask.

I am not sure I understand the part in bold. Could you rephrase?

[SpheresBEE]

@EricJH post:2

@SpheresBEE post:1

so I finally allow comodo access, and it doesn’t phone home, to allow my using it, like it does if I’d given it access from the beginning. So why so vindictive. What’s done initially, during/at completion of install that can’t be done while us users watch?

I am not sure I understand the part in bold. Could you rephrase?

Sure!
Since at least v3x, though I’ve used v2x, when I was much ‘younger,’ comodo phones home immediately after installation, to ‘register,’ I’m sure?? But since then I’ve noticed that if I install it, without physically being connected to the WAN, then much later I finally physically connect, I cannot connect with a normal browser setup. I mean that I can still connect with Tor, though at a diminished throughput. Which speaks of the fact that windows networking is set up just fine. Through comodo, initially, I always deny auto access to my DNS servers, (svchost), until I can designate the two precise IP’s and ports to be used, for my main and backup DNS servers. I shall never allow an ‘any’ access through any firewall for something that can be ‘hard wired,’ so to speak. The final rule in the sequence, of course, is always deny! I lock down as much as I can. I don’t even run DHCP in my hardware router/firewall. I net mask to as few IP’s as I require on my LAN, statically assign to specific MAC’s, even going so far as to create spoofed MAC’s that are assigned to the few left over IPs that the Masking affords, such that no one can IP spoof my LAN, I have a standard Ethernet connection. All auto updaters on my computers, are always turned off. My security, ex-DOD employee, requires that the only connection to the web, WHAT-SO-EVER, is one I consciously initiate. Auto anything is for lazy and/or newbie point and clickers, IMHO! Not that I’m either pointing any fingers, or being necessarily condescending, I wouldn’t be so presumptuous. Each to their own, live and let live, all that philosophically sound ideology, of course. Though there’s no need to lead this bull, or sheep for that matter, by a ring in his nose. All those years of DOD security, starting with ARPANET, is just hard to live down. TEMPEST, anyone?

Do our dialects, finally jive? If more clarification is required, just ask.

And thanks for your time, whatever the motivating force.

[Citizen_K]

I don’t think there is some vindictiveness on Comodo’s end. It is most likely a bug.

So, if you have the time and energy please consider filing a bug report in the Bug Reports - CIS board following the format as described in FORMAT & GUIDE - just COPY/PASTE it!.

Reporting of bugs is strictly moderated to make sure Comodo gets clear bug reports. So, please make sure you closely follow protocol. That way your report will certainly be seen by Comodo staff.