Comodo Firewall or Online Armor Free

[KotaXor]

I unistalled it because i wanted to tr a difrent firewall and when i come and check... i see this... I dont know what to do to delete it..

Did you try to delete the registry keys?

[shought]

I unistalled it because i wanted to tr a difrent firewall and when i come and check... i see this... I dont know what to do to delete it..

Did you try to delete the registry keys?

To do so start regedit(Start, Run, regedit.exe, Enter) and search for Comodo and delete all registry keys found containing Comodo.

[KotaXor]

I unistalled it because i wanted to tr a difrent firewall and when i come and check... i see this... I dont know what to do to delete it..

Did you try to delete the registry keys?

To do so start regedit(Start, Run, regedit.exe, Enter) and search for Comodo and delete all registry keys found containing Comodo.

I think the folder of this key is called ComodoGroup, just delete the whole folder.

Oops...should edit instead of posting twice....sry!

[lal krishna]

The Only release so far from ENGiNE is "Online Armor v1.1.1.826 Bilingual crack by ENGiNE",and that is an old version.

If you come come across a 'crack' for the paid version of Online Armor Personal 2.1.0.131, I'm always interested.

LOL.There is always Outpost Pro,if you need "it",PM me.

[Noddy]

Hey thanks, Buddy for the offer - actually, after going through the ratings I had already downloaded Outpost Firewall Pro 2009 Build 6.5.2356.316.0603. However, they seemed to have just come up with another update today, Outpost Firewall Pro 2009 Build 6.5.2358.316.0607. This frequent update augurs well for End-users like us.

I'll try 'Outpost Pro' some other time - at the moment, am trying to master my COMODO. ;)

[LoKz]

Hey thanks, Buddy for the offer - actually, after going through the ratings I had already downloaded Outpost Firewall Pro 2009 Build 6.5.2356.316.0603. However, they seemed to have just come up with another update today, Outpost Firewall Pro 2009 Build 6.5.2358.316.0607. This frequent update augurs well for End-users like us.

I'll try 'Outpost Pro' some other time - at the moment, am trying to master my COMODO. ;)

Bring back some info on how it goes ;) and i'll try to delete al the registry thank u

[lal krishna]

Hey thanks, Buddy for the offer - actually, after going through the ratings I had already downloaded Outpost Firewall Pro 2009 Build 6.5.2356.316.0603. However, they seemed to have just come up with another update today, Outpost Firewall Pro 2009 Build 6.5.2358.316.0607. This frequent update augurs well for End-users like us.

I'll try 'Outpost Pro' some other time - at the moment, am trying to master my COMODO. ;)

Is it supposed to update by itself?Because mine still says 6.5.2358.316.0597.I updated through the update Tab,but it doesn't seem to update the version.

[Noddy]

Is it supposed to update by itself?Because mine still says 6.5.2358.316.0597.I updated through the update Tab,but it doesn't seem to update the version.

Generally speaking, I too would've believed that it should auto-update (especially since Outpost Pro is serial-cracked.) Perhaps, it's too early and they've not yet started rolling out the updates.

Bring back some info on how it goes ;) and i'll try to delete al the registry thank u

I will, LoKz - my sympathies also for the grief that COMODO has brought upon you.

[KotaXor]

Most software do not do a clean uninstall, leaving residue in the registry and some other places.

[einstürzende]

Outpost is software of the past, inability to set police to protect folder from writing, ad streams writing nonrecognition make it vulnerable to real malware (e.g. some rootkits, "dropper" techniques etc.), I strongly recommend full featured HIPS (like D+, EQsecure, Prosecurity... or some sandboxes or returnil like softs.) instead half protection OP can offer...

[sarge52]

I'm a big fan of Comodo as of late...have not tried online armor but thumbs up to Comodo

[demonon]

If you come come across a 'crack' for the paid version of Online Armor Personal 2.1.0.131, I'm always interested.

Yes, I too want to try the paid version of Online Armor.

TBH, if it really provides everything it says it provides in the paid version, I would prefer using Online Armor over Comodo.

@einstürzende

Can a firewall with HIPS protection really replace an AV?

[Bizarre™]

If you come come across a 'crack' for the paid version of Online Armor Personal 2.1.0.131, I'm always interested.

Yes, I too want to try the paid version of Online Armor.

TBH, if it really provides everything it says it provides in the paid version, I would prefer using Online Armor over Comodo.

@einstürzende

Can a firewall with HIPS protection really replace an AV?

The answer is simple... really.

No.

Why?

1. Because of the general fact that there is nothing perfect in this world... as long as it is done by beings called "Humans."

2. HIPS only intercept suspicious processes, but if it passes through them... then it's another story.

[demonon]

I know there isn't or never will be a perfect way to protect your computer.

Let me make my question a little more specific.

Can HIPS protect your from malware when your a safe surfer. (I don't download suspicious files, open mail from unknown senders and have my Browser sandboxed)

[lal krishna]

Outpost is software of the past, inability to set police to protect folder from writing, ad streams writing nonrecognition make it vulnerable to real malware (e.g. some rootkits, "dropper" techniques etc.), I strongly recommend full featured HIPS (like D+, EQsecure, Prosecurity... or some sandboxes or returnil like softs.) instead half protection OP can offer...

ummmm....Setting aside the HIPS,which is no playground for n00bs,do you have any evidence to substantiate your claims?Don't get me wrong,I found the Online Armor paid version the best,second was Outpost pro.Comodo scored only almost half of what Outpost scored in leaktests.(Firewall leaktester.com).Stopping attacks,nobody is bad,though Zonealarm is the best in fighting termination of it's own process.Any comments?

@demonon,having something like Processguard,though little outdated,protects you 50% time,by blocking driver installation,blocking global hooks,preventing code injection etc.

[einstürzende]

gkweb´s firewallleaktester.com is totally outdated ...

However Matousec.com have weird (paid/greed driven) sense for testing, as you can see on his site CFP3 is tested with outdated build 3.*.22.???, up to date version is....25... which came out at 30th May, from v. 23 CPF3 passes all leaktests except maybe socksnif which I was unable to test.

Some of leaktest (most in fact) have no value as a p.o.c. for real malware. In real world malware uses different technique to infest system, Classic HIPS and behavior blockers which only support outbound connection filtering in classic FWs are two very different things with different task but with similar technology.

HIPS are not impenetrable mostly because built in bugs, incomplete api defense (developers competence/incompetence), usability vs. more api coverage etc.

But this does not mean AV is necessary, great and close to perfection security set (if you ask me) is CFP3 (with D+) + Sandboxie, geswall pro (alone) ... there are great programs which are not widely spread and practically unknown or more known in some parts of the world then in another.

For testing your security sets against real malware go to: http://vx.netlux.org/ or http://www.offensivecomputing.net/

and be careful with real malware on above sites, use: vmware or something similar...

[ffi]

However Matousec.com have weird (paid/greed driven) sense for testing,

This would make me trust Matousec more not less.

If the are a commercial institution they need to be careful of their reputation because their reputation is worth (future) money. If they loose trust by doing bad tests they will not make any money anymore and they will go bankrupt. On the otherhand for a non-commercial tester their reputation does not value them money so they do not care if they loose it. A non-commercial tester could therefor make or break a product, just for the fun of it, without loosing anything of value to them.

[Bizarre™]

I know there isn't or never will be a perfect way to protect your computer.

Let me make my question a little more specific.

Can HIPS protect your from malware when your a safe surfer. (I don't download suspicious files, open mail from unknown senders and have my Browser sandboxed)

Well, it seems that you already know the answer to your question. :unsure:

[einstürzende]

This would make me trust Matousec more not less.

If the are a commercial institution they need to be careful of their reputation because their reputation is worth (future) money. If they loose trust by doing bad tests they will not make any money anymore and they will go bankrupt. On the otherhand for a non-commercial tester their reputation does not value them money so they do not care if they loose it. A non-commercial tester could therefor make or break a product, just for the fun of it, without loosing anything of value to them.

On the contrary,

Comodo devs. decided not to pay retests (sense of cheapness they say), their app. is free to all, so goes for testers also...

What then to say to Matoušek, he/they deceive public in its test by not testing all apps. at the same time and with current builds/versions, so his reputation is violated (driven by greed for money).

Real result at the moment will be CFP3 99% (out of 73) (level reached 10+) at least...

[lal krishna]

einstürzende,I salute you for that .I found a real "geek"(no offense) at last.Just one more question.How about process termination?CFP,I found is too easy to terminate when compared to others?Did you do any tests on this?Don't get me wrong,I am not questioning your knowledge,I am just trying to learn from the past mistakes and any input from a knowledgable fella like you will just help me a lot.Please,If you haven't done any termination tests yet,can you please do it for "us"?

[manpe]

Any idea when Online Armor comes out for Vista ?

[UnixSofter]

Any idea when Online Armor comes out for Vista ?

[manpe]

A silly question - is free version's firewall less effective than the paid version's ? Or does the paid version come simply with some extras ?

And would it be a good idea to use Windows Firewall + Online Armor Free or just Windows Firewall/Online Armor Free ?

-EDIT-

I tried to install the beta version of OA ... it still says it doesn't support Vista ;)

[Noddy]

The paid version of Online Armor does have more 'extras' than the free version - it's any day better, too. To check on these 'extras' go to the following page of the Online Armor Publisher, Tallemu:-

http://www.tallemu.com/comparisons.html

It's not a good idea to use any two firewalls, together.

[manpe]

Anyway... the free version says it doesn't support Vista, and the trial version says it doesn't support Windows 64-bit (although I have installed 32-bit programs).

I don't know.. I think I'll stick to Windows Firewall while they fix the glitches. I remember that Comodo used to bug me a lot, it got on my nerves finally. I never tried OA though, so I can't say it's better either.