Comodo Internet Security 5.0.32580.1142

[Night Owl]

If you want to know more, visit COMODO forums: Link

Regardless, to be on the safe side the listing has been reverted back to 5.0.162636.1135.

Thanks, Bizarre™. We're getting there, but 5.0.162636.1135 is not the latest version. 5.0.163652.1142 is the latest version.

Re: COMODO Internet Security 5.0.162636.1135 & 1142 Released!

« Reply #584 on: October 29, 2010, 01:27:15 AM »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1135 is the latest version that is why there is no release topic.

1142 is for members with CIS 4 who upgraded to CIS 5 this was the only reason for the release, that is why no new topic has been made.

The version for download has also been changed to match this number with very minor changes.

Latest Release notes

Version 5.0: 14 September, 2010

■THANKS! Comodo thanks its beta testers whose feedback made this release possible

■NEW! Spyware Scanner detects and cleans malware infections in PC registry and disks

■NEW! Cloud based Antivirus detects malicious file even if virus defintions not up-to-date

■NEW! Cloud based Behavior Analysis system can detect zero-day malware INSTANTLY

■NEW! Cloud based Whitelisting of trusted publisher easily identifies a safe file and vendor

■NEW! Game Mode to suppress alerts, updates and scans from interfering with gaming

■NEW! Heuristic detection identifies real file behind requests of “interpreter” applications

■NEW! Application Control for users to restrict execution to known good applications only

■IMPROVED! Windows Compatibility from new Sandbox default application isolation level

■IMPROVED! Application Compatibility with easily identified safe files and trusted vendors

■IMPROVED! User Interface with new status allows instant user action to reported events

Source: COMODO Internet Security 5.0.162636.1135 & 1142 Released! (Note: dereferer doesn't work — it's page 39, the very last post on the page)

[Brrownie]

@ Bizarre

No one is perfect...that’s why pencils have erasers. ....

@ N Owl

Thanks for correcting that it was Bizz...;)

Peace....:D

[Night Owl]

Uncharacteristically, Bizarre™ has made quite a few mistakes today. :(

And pray tell what these few mistakes today are?

The only blunder I will admit is for not testing this particular version of COMODO.

Since you asked now:

1. Obviously this Comodo update that never was
   

2. Thanks to dsc18 for the update.

   But he's dcs18, not dsc18.
   
3. Latest Comodo version is 5.0.163652.1142 instead of 5.0.162636.1135
   
4. Sysinternals 2010.11.01 was posted as 2010.01.11 (all previous postings were of the format YYYY.MM.DD as I posted in the Sysinternals update earlier today).
   

[*dcs18]

Uncharacteristically, Bizarre™ has made quite a few mistakes today. :(

If this news is not true, I suppose the blame should fall squarely on my shoulders. Generally, I test the software prior to posting them. Today, when I broke news on COMODO and SkipScreen, I was kept busy undoing the damage caused to many systems by 0.5.11s. Hence, instead of installing the newer COMODO - I just performed an hash check and the file differences satisfied me. Moreover, when the cursor is hovered over the new installer the tooltip clearly indicated 5.0.32580.1142 :(

The news was sourced from 2 beta-testers at COMODO who continue to stick by 5.0.32580.1142 - my apologies for the inconvenience caused to members. :P

[Darker_Than_Black]

Hey Mr Night Owl, why don't you back off?

You're not paying anyone here, so you don't have the right to criticize. Please stop being a :smartass:

[shought]

I think at this time this topic (well, actually the 'side-topic') requires some summarizing:

Biz made a mistake. Night Owl pointed it out adding 'Uncharacteristically, Bizarre™ has made quite a few mistakes today. :('. 'quite a few mistakes' probably wasn't received too well by Biz (which I can imagine, it's never nice to hear you made a, let alone multiple, mistakes). However Bizarre might not have noticed 'Uncharacteristically' (which, I have to admit, I missed when reading the post for the first time as well), which suggests that Night Owl appreciates Biz's work and point out that it is NOT common for Biz to make mistakes (which is a compliment, of sorts :)).

Darker_Than_Black probably missed the word 'Uncharacteristically' as well and, as did Biz and I (at first), considered Night Owl's reply to be the reply of a 'smartass' (referring to the smiley in Darker_Than_Black's post).

I hope the above clears things up a little, for all concerned and not-concerned.

-----

Now even though Night Owl's reply was not intended in the way in which it was received, I'd like to ask you all to support our staff, in every possible way. They are humans and ALL humans make mistakes. Of course you should point out their mistakes, but consider how it makes them feel and adjust your 'way of' pointing out those mistakes to that consideration ;)

In short: supporting our staff does not only mean pointing out their mistakes (or even 'complementing' them), but also consider how to do so, in order to create an optimal environment for our staff, other members; our whole community.

(ps in this particular case the use of the bold red letters should maybe have been reconsidered. Just a suggestion :))

Edit: (Maybe the 'uncharacteristically' could have been in bold green letters instead :D)

[Lite]

Topic Closed.

Apologies for posting this currently non-available update. When this update becomes available we will post a new topic.