On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 00:56:57 GMT, "David H. Lipman"
<DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote:
>
>Comodo is overexuberant in its messages. Either set it to be less sensitive and remove
>Comodo FireWall.
Perhasps so but your response doesn't answer my question. Why would it
even detect SAS as making changes to exe files with internet access
when it's not even running?
Garrot <no@email.invalid> wrote in
news:9sm1639olu1itc3jcs48puih916s1l93ir@4ax.com:
> On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 00:56:57 GMT, "David H. Lipman"
> <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Comodo is overexuberant in its messages. Either set it to be less
>>sensitive and remove Comodo FireWall.
>
> Perhasps so but your response doesn't answer my question. Why would it
> even detect SAS as making changes to exe files with internet access
> when it's not even running?
>
A false alarm. It thinks it sees SAS in memory and it's something else.
--
Dustin Cook
Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - v2.2c
email: bughunter.dustin@gmail.com.removethis
web..: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
Pad..: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml
On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 03:06:47 GMT, Dustin Cook
<spamfilterineffect.see.sig@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>A false alarm. It thinks it sees SAS in memory and it's something else.
Oh well, I think I will dump Commodo anyway. This is the first time I
have used it and it is starting to annoy me. It keeps asking for
program access to the internet for progs I have already allowed.
Garrot <no@email.invalid> wrote in news884639qcfsu65cda47b8vre4vv7gsg5t8@
4ax.com:
> On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 03:06:47 GMT, Dustin Cook
> <spamfilterineffect.see.sig@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>A false alarm. It thinks it sees SAS in memory and it's something else.
>
> Oh well, I think I will dump Commodo anyway. This is the first time I
> have used it and it is starting to annoy me. It keeps asking for
> program access to the internet for progs I have already allowed.
>
I don't know what Commodo or Comodo software you are talking about. Can
you be more specific? It seems this company has collected some other
companies' products and is reselling them in a rebranded fashion. My only
real experience is with BOClean malware protection, with the caveat that I
have not had any problems or alerts from it. Either I have never had the
need to have its protection, or it has been so transparently efficient that
I was protected.
On this machine I use a company version of symantec AV and firewall
provided free to me as part of my employment. On another machine, my
spouse ases AVG free AV and zonealarm free. Of course ZA has its quirks
that one learns to live with.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 10:59:26 GMT, Han <nobody@nospam.not> wrote:
>I don't know what Commodo or Comodo software you are talking about. Can
>you be more specific? It seems this company has collected some other
>companies' products and is reselling them in a rebranded fashion. My only
>real experience is with BOClean malware protection, with the caveat that I
>have not had any problems or alerts from it. Either I have never had the
>need to have its protection, or it has been so transparently efficient that
>I was protected.
>
>On this machine I use a company version of symantec AV and firewall
>provided free to me as part of my employment. On another machine, my
>spouse ases AVG free AV and zonealarm free. Of course ZA has its quirks
>that one learns to live with.
Comodo is a firewall. I donb't like Symantec as their products hijack
your PC. I've had problems with ZoneAlarm in the past too. Usually I
use an old version of Kerio but it is vulnerable to fragmented packets
so thought I would try something more recent.
Garrot <no@email.invalid> wrote in
news:na5663tf76h5hjkjif3eqbl6n0hamp2t2a@4ax.com:
> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 10:59:26 GMT, Han <nobody@nospam.not> wrote:
>
>
>>I don't know what Commodo or Comodo software you are talking about.
>>Can you be more specific? It seems this company has collected some
>>other companies' products and is reselling them in a rebranded
>>fashion. My only real experience is with BOClean malware protection,
>>with the caveat that I have not had any problems or alerts from it.
>>Either I have never had the need to have its protection, or it has
>>been so transparently efficient that I was protected.
>>
>>On this machine I use a company version of symantec AV and firewall
>>provided free to me as part of my employment. On another machine, my
>>spouse ases AVG free AV and zonealarm free. Of course ZA has its
>>quirks that one learns to live with.
>
> Comodo is a firewall. I donb't like Symantec as their products hijack
> your PC. I've had problems with ZoneAlarm in the past too. Usually I
> use an old version of Kerio but it is vulnerable to fragmented packets
> so thought I would try something more recent.
>
My confusion was because Comodo now has a lot of different software,
including a firewall, AV, and antimalware. I onmly have the antimalware
(formerly BOClean from NSClean, now Comodo BOClean).
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
From: "Han" <nobody@nospam.not>
| My confusion was because Comodo now has a lot of different software,
| including a firewall, AV, and antimalware. I onmly have the antimalware
| (formerly BOClean from NSClean, now Comodo BOClean).
|
BOClean was by Kevin (and Nancy) and now Kevein is employed by Comodo and it s now a Comodo
product.
An attempt to strengthen their product lines.
--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm
On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:44:15 GMT, Han <nobody@nospam.not> wrote:
>My confusion was because Comodo now has a lot of different software,
>including a firewall, AV, and antimalware. I onmly have the antimalware
>(formerly BOClean from NSClean, now Comodo BOClean).
I'm just trying out the free firewall and none of their other
products. One thing I have noticed that is annoying is that if I block
all trafic it doesn't get unblocked when I set Comodo to unblock, it
only unblocks after a reboot.
In article <9sm1639olu1itc3jcs48puih916s1l93ir@4ax.com>,
no@email.invalid says...
> On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 00:56:57 GMT, "David H. Lipman"
> <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote:
>
>
> >
> >Comodo is overexuberant in its messages. Either set it to be less sensitive and remove
> >Comodo FireWall.
>
> Perhasps so but your response doesn't answer my question. Why would it
> even detect SAS as making changes to exe files with internet access
> when it's not even running?
Why would you use something that is know to be problematic, give many
false alarms/alerts... If you were to have/use a NAT Router it would
provide the same level of protection, when combined with the Windows XP
Firewall, and you would not have these false alerts.
--
Want to know what PCBUTTS1 is really about?
*** WARNING - these links contain foul/pornographic content of an
abusive nature created by PCBUTTS1 and still hosted on his public
website ***
http://www.pcbutts1.com/rlk/rlk.htm Exposed to Kids ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/license.htm Exposed to Kids ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/downloads/max.htm Exposed to Kids ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/downloads/mpv.htm Exposed to Kids ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/downloads/wtcpcb.htm Exposed to Kids ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/cracks.htm Exposed to Kids ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/Louthe*******.htm REMOVED ,
http://www.pcbutts1.com/downloads/bughunters.htm Exposed to Kids ...
All while spamming his company website at: http://www.seedsv.com
On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 09:07:06 -0400, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:
>Why would you use something that is know to be problematic, give many
>false alarms/alerts... If you were to have/use a NAT Router it would
>provide the same level of protection, when combined with the Windows XP
>Firewall, and you would not have these false alerts.
Because this is not my XP computer, it is a third computer I have with
Win2K installed which comes with no firewall. OK?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote