Kiwi
Premium
join:2003-05-26
USA
 ·Comcast
 ·Aristotle Internet
| reply to rotty97
Re: Comodo acquires BOClean
Trojans & virus activity seems relevant to a preponderance of stupidity, in surfing habits.
The larger picture are those programs that have a propensity to ASPI hook into your personal realm; meaning those that have no moral issue in accessing your pass worded material. Evident when one installs a program & utilizes that programs email log in~ sign in. -Is it only me that finds it strange that in such a circumstance, when prompted for a sign in....I notice secure log in features [Like a user_name] that's not ever been part of the picture for THAT program or log in, but is for another AND secure site? |
|
surgicalstrike
@bna.com
| reply to Comonodo
"From a financial point of view, the other way around would be far more likely."
We'll see.  Muahahahahaha.  |
|
Comonodo
@xs4all.nl
| reply to morgan edge
quote:
Hey Comodo guys, can you buy NOD32 next so I can get free copy of that too?
From a financial point of view, the other way around would be far more likely. So keep on dreaming  |
|
Buddel
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Premium
join:2004-03-06
EU
| reply to rotty97
Eset has always made sure that NOD32
(1) is light on resources
(2) is compatible even with older operating systems
(3) runs very smoothly on most machines
(4) detects almost all sorts of malware.
If NOD32 belonged to Comodo, I'm not too sure whether this AV would still be as good as it has always been. And yes, the four points I mentioned above also apply to BOClean. What's more, BOClean support has always been fantastic. Will we also get this top-notch support now that BOClean belongs to Comodo? I have my doubts... |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast
| reply to Buddel
said by Buddel  :said by morgan edge :
Hey Comodo guys, can you buy NOD32 next ...
I do hope this will never happen. Why is that Buddel?
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
Buddel
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Premium
join:2004-03-06
EU | reply to morgan edge
said by morgan edge :
Hey Comodo guys, can you buy NOD32 next ...
I do hope this will never happen. |
|
Be1ge
join:2006-07-01
1 edit | reply to out yet
No not yet but Kevin is working on it.
There is now a Comodo BOClean forum over at the Comodo website where Kevin posts daily.
He mentioned something about "getting it out" or "getting it out right" then said when BOClean is ready everyone will know. |
|
out yet
@bna.com | reply to rotty97
So is the free Comodo BOClean out yet? |
|
morgan edge
@serverkompetenz.net
 from:
dadkins
| reply to rotty97
Hey Comodo guys, can you buy NOD32 next so I can get free copy of that too? Now that would be kewl. |
|
Psicop
More human than human
Premium
join:2005-12-21
| reply to K McAleavey
Kevin,
Thanks for being straight forward otherwise you wouldn't post either in here or at Wilders in the first place.
Yes the key question is the one you stated right at the beginning of your post:
YOU CANNOT POSSIBLY COMPETE AGAINST A FREEBIE.
Look at the magic 3 for example: Avast-AVG-Antivir.
What's the point of paying $60 bucks a year when you have basically the same product in free form.
Let me tell you the only investment I made in this machine is my "near-industrial-strength router", and let me assure you nothing gets past it even when I surfed well into the dark side for testing purposes. But the router is only one more layer, there are others as well which are in essence: Limited account, tightened OS and "neural-gymnastics."
You did what you had to do, and that is called: feed your stomach first. I still can't believe the fact of some consumers whining for your decision. I guess they need to invest not in a product but in a process itself, and IMO BoClean is not the answer.
Good luck in your new venture.
Regards. |
|
rotty97
join:2005-06-30
Australia
| reply to Howyoudoing
Kevin, why is the aim to go deeper into the Kernel?? Windows Vista has locked the Kernel will your new technique work with Vista?
Personally i think going into the kernel at all is not a future-proof solution and is about as effective in the long term as using signature based scanning ONLY (Signature scanning is usually less damaging to the users computer than kernel mode anti-stuff).
Without asking too much info, your new technique sounds like you are almost just loading the OS into a VM session???
Would your technique resist being loaded into a VM session?? |
|
Howyoudoing
@swbell.net
|  reply to rotty97
I've never heard of BOClean till now but i definitely know, from what I've been reading, is that it has done a damn good job and will continue to do a damn good job. BOClean is not the miracle software that will protect you from ALL the internet roaches but has and will continue to do what it's first intention was to do from the beginning, it may change it's way of handling things but the same goal is still there. Is there really a one-software-fix-all? I don't think there is. BOClean may not be ritcher35, dadkins, or even my cup of tea, but to each his own. What it boils down to is that BOClean has helped many ppl, from it's history i don't doubt that it has helped thousands of ppl, and will continue to help ppl regardless. In conclusion, even though I've never used BOClean, probably because I've never heard of it before cus' i do like to tweak , I give BOClean props and respect for the commitment and dedication to accomplish and maintain it's goals. Two thumbs up! |
|
richter35
Premium
join:2004-01-03
Croatia
1 edit | reply to rotty97
Long boring one...
*Somehow I know this is going to end up being taken harshly, but here it goes*
Thanks Kevin for replying in this thread. I for one used to visit Wilders daily a couple of years ago, but certain things took me off it. It's excellent resource on various software, tips, news and all, but BBR seems more balanced when it comes to discussions, to me.
Anyway, as others have said, you have to forgive us for being skeptical about Comodo. While they might not be a startup, they're rather new in this area (firewall/antivirus). It's better to be somewhat reserved than being blind follower. While they might have good intentions, they're first and foremost a company, and a company is driven by profits rather than altruistic deeds.
I don't agree with comments on saying that you sold out or that this is about money. In the end it is. You did not have enough resources aka funds to let BOClean thrive in direction you wanted it. This is not a bad thing. You're a person who works, has to pay his bills and needs to have some fun. It's better that you made sure it lives on rather than following the footsteps of other companies in AT business. I was astonished how unprofessionally DiamondCS handled their situation and the way they pulled out. While I won't comment on this and do not wish to start discussion related to it, I have huge respect for you as person looking how this situation is being handled.
Regarding BOClean itself. You probably feel like Galileo Galilei trying to explain the crowd that the Earth is not in the center of the universe. I somehow get your point and the way you try to tell us that what we believe how things should be done is passé. However, I know that you take different approach from the others. You diversified your software in a way that it doesn’t scan everything it moves, but rather that it should jump in when it’s really necessary, keeping resource load on minimum and nourishing the approach “don’t get infected in the first place”. All that is excellent and totally understandable.
The thing is that we’re not on same frequency. The reason why 99.99% of people will think different from you is that 99.99% of software do things that way. You are marketing BOClean as software which is used in conjunction with customer’s regular AV, and acts only when your AVs resident scanner does not detect malware. That sounds perfect. Then comes ignoramus like me and asks himself – If I already have good AV scanner with good detection rate, why do I need to run separate software to cover its back? Are “wasted” resources justifiable if I already well protected (patched system, firewall, AV, reading info on latest threats…)? How good this software really is (detection rate) vs other software of same kind? And number of other questions. Do note, I’m not asking these questions…I’m just saying that I ask myself this when I decide if I would want to use it. The truth is, computers get infected. Computers need to get disinfected. Tools of that kind are high on demand. While BOClean might be excellent software, it might not appeal to everyone no matter how much everyone would like it. Set as forget approach is excellent, but can you guarantee that unlike AVs, BOClean will catch everything (of course you can’t but that’s the general feeling when discussing this little gem)? It is signature based like the rest of the crowd, therefore is dependant on how quickly can it get updated to detect new nasties. I have no idea about technology/engines and all that. I’m not competent to talk about that (and probably about anything in this matter anyway). The truth is that BOClean might be great at what it does, and from user feedback it is, I find the range it covers a bit narrow. Don’t bite my head off for stating this without any evidence. As trivial and faulty it might be, I've never see any comparison which was not possible due to nature of this software. I can't wait until someone compares it against others once it is available for everyone. The main “issue” with BOClean is that, while it’s light and it’s great to protect system, it’s coverage is not wide enough to have it running solely by itself thus taking advantage of your approach on detaching nasties when they pose real threat. You still need other software to cover spyware/viruses - as BOClean is primarily an AT, I am not stating it does not detect other type of malware, just generalizing situation here a bit. Ten years ago it might have been bar none, but most AV these days are being multifunctional and do detect all kind of malware rather than just viruses like they used to thus running additional AT scanner makes little sense. Since “both” are signatures based, it’s just a matter of time who gets it first.
I may be totally wrong and I know most will disagree which is irrelevant as we’re having discussion. Even if we do step away a bit from some of us arguing whether or not we want AV/AT scanner to detect malware before it gets on your system, having it scanned constantly or just when it gets executed. The question being is BOClean all that better and superior in pure detection and malware coverage than what others are already offering? So far I have seen nothing but hearsay. And I am not trying to offend anyone here. BOClean has excellent reputation, which is something you have to earn and can loose easily. However, being focused on certain type of malware makes it less appealing for average Joe than some solution which offers better all around protection. Now, I know I’ll get replies to use multi-layered approach, and how BOClean is just addition to your AV scanner… The spectrum of BOClean (to my knowledge, and again I’m not competent to discuss its detection abilities) is rather narrow, AVs aren’t what they used to be and you no longer have to pull AV companies by their shirt to convince them that Trojans and spyware pose much greater threat than virus. They have resources, they are catching up and are getting better at it. So how can BOClean compare to competition? Is it unfair to compare others? How can you compare the two as anyone can argue that it’s not meant to be first line defense at all. I will argue if I really need second line defense as AVs are getting better and better in field that was once exclusive to BOClean/TrojanHunter and the gang. Once pure (correct me if I’m wrong) Trojan scanners (Ewido) evolving in all around mastodon which is capable to do a lot against tougher threats like spyware and trojans. Regular users don’t know about multilayer defense. They probably never heard of BOclean, they are less likely to use multiple solution that “do the same thing”.
To somehow sum up as I’m going way too broad than I wanted to be in the first place. Regardless of the way software functions – on-access ‘80s style or 23rd century memory/kernel only style (totally up to user user – some people here use “stone age” type of application and who am I to say it is worse than brand new vista style with shiny icons program of same/similar purpose), I just don’t see the advantage of BOClean to what others already offer. The way things progress nowadays the situation in which only BOClean will have definition for something good AV won’t, and taking into consideration most people don’t get infected with uber new just coded 5 minutes ago malware is rather unlikely makes BOClean… somewhat redundant, IMO. I know I’ll get 100 replies on success stories where BOClean saved their back for this sentence alone, but then again…I have no proof those are really true. BOClean did come as a champ in catching some nasties over past few years that I’ve read and seen videos of, but the glory did not last long before every major vendor caught up. Now…those things happen, but rare. We can spend 100 years talking what will happen if…but generally speaking, is it really needed to run something all the time when it will jump in once in 5 years. Most here will say yes, but I personally don’t. And even if something gets passed through, I will have a shot at fixing with something that does detect it – the 80s style – with on-demand scanner. You can argue that it’s redundant, it’s not needed…but truth is, it does come in handy when you do need it and not all of us deal with malware as their hobby and like to keep everything off – active or not. It’s just like with a supercar. Why do you need a car that can go 400km/h when you can’t achieve top speed on “any” road/highway and regular car will get you anywhere as well and can achieve its potential with ease. While my analogy could be/is flawed, the point is that you have a choice. It has nothing to do with paranoia, some people like apples while others like oranges. Why should I believe one way is the only way/the best to go? I personally won’t.
*Sorry to put you all to sleep with non-eloquent, poorly written, even worse elaborated post with utterly long sentences which you will have to blame my mother tongue for *
‘Night all. Kevin all the best with Comodo and keep it up despite Judas like me. |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast
4 edits | reply to K McAleavey
Re: Comodo acquires BOClean
said by K McAleavey : No offense intended here, but it's always been amazing how low the bar has been for so-called "security experts" in forums.
Yep! Sure is! Good thing I have *NEVER* even eluded to be an expert on security! I try software. I put it up against REAL malware. If something is great, I will say "It's Great!". If something sucks, I will say "It Sucks!". There is a certain product/company I like. They let me trial a new product. Well, it sucked! I TOLD them it sucked! Because, it *DID* suck! I have never had a chance to try your BOC until recently. No punches pulled here Kevin, so far...  The only thing it has seen that my AV didn't, was Gibson's Leak Test - a firewall test. I have other software here that. IMO, is better than your product! Sorry. I will continue to test thrash on that poor machine and see if BOC ever proves itself. You still haven't addressed my question - doesn't BOC receive signature updates? Wouldn't that put BOC also into the "signature-based mentality" that you dislike? Whatever friend! I hope you and COMODO do work out, and you get to improve THEIR software! Have a great evening Kevin! David EDIT: In response to the NetBus querry... No, I couldn't run it! BOC wouldn't let me run it. What does that tell you? Problem is though, I had to kill my AV before I could even download it! Once downloaded, if I re-enabled the AV... detected and deleted. Ok, leave AV off... extract the NetBus exe... BOC didn't flinch. Clicked the NetBus exe... BOC stopped it. So... it seems that I have a new monitor progran that detects an old ass exe... if,for whatever reason, my AV is ever turned off(HINT: AV is never turned off except to test... a new program)... I'm covered? I can have that with other residents. You see, the NetBus excuse it tired. It is better IMO to never let that kind of crap on the machine instead of relying(I don't rely or trust anything) on something to catch it when/if it runs. With AV off and BOC on, I can download god knows what. With AV on, I can't even download these items. So tell me/us again, what sets BOC apart from... other resident AT/AS/AM/A? programs... --
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
K McAleavey
Premium
join:2003-11-12
Voorheesville, NY
| reply to dadkins
Yeah, seen yer comments and not to worry ... know where you're coming from. And NO, it isn't impressing ME either lately because the last time there's been any major code improvements in it was over a year ago now. Why? I had to choose. Cover the ZLOBS and other "real world" nasties actually infecting people's machines and deal with them *OR* do what I *knew* needed to be done for our code and *NOT* do those. Rock, hard place. And 4.23 will be only the slightest improvement in fixing the "low hanging fruit" so we can get it out the door quickly.
What I'd suggest is to let the dust settle, it's certainly better than any of our "competitors" are even as it lays. And once I don't have to be stuck in a lab for 30 hour shifts (32 tonight) any longer once my teams replace me with doing the malware, I'll FINALLY have time to do the coding again and get us back where we should be. All a matter of priorities and situations that were beyond my control. Until LAST WEEK.
Yeah, BOClean ain't what it used to be as far as leading edge goes ... that's why we HAD to do what we did or just pull the plug. Give it a shot and enjoy your freebie (or not) ... as I said enough already, "anti-anything" is *SO* 1980's. Same for your favorite AV. There's better answers and they're ALREADY getting coded, that's why I'm still awake. And those will be out sooner rather than later.
But in all fairness, I've read what your expectations are and you STILL don't understand the purpose or the design. And as far as that netbus silliness you posted a couple of days ago - you put up a windows folder with netbus.exe icon in it. You *ARE* aware owing to your critical expertise in all of this that NETBUS.EXE is the "client and builder" and NOT the actual trojan itself? You DID run NETBUS.EXE and "create server" and then run it to actually test BOClean?
You DID, right?
No offense intended here, but it's always been amazing how low the bar has been for so-called "security experts" in forums.
--
Kevin McAleavey submissions@nsclean.com
»www.nsclean.com
Makers of BOClean |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast
1 edit | reply to K McAleavey
No offense Kevin, but doesn't BOC get Signature updates too?
I wish you nothing but the best... but some of the things you and your fellow BOC users post is humorous.
I have a running copy of BOC(don't ask) and I am sorry to say, I'm not impressed.
It does not live up to all the posts that I have read over the years.
I currently cannot say whether or not it is a necessary product.
First impressions though, now that I CAN try it, not too great - *SO FAR*.
We shall see...
Thanks to _________________ for giving me a chance to finally TRIAL BOClean. |
|
mers2
Premium,MVM
join:2004-03-20
USA
clubs:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to K McAleavey
said by K McAleavey : Whoops! Sticky fingers after too many hours once again ... you're correct ... I'm STILL trying to figure out how to pronounce his LAST name but am too embarassed to ask. But the misspelling does help me to pronounce it properly to his face and I *really* like the guy and don't want to get that wrong too. Me needs sleep but dropped by and couldn't believe that all the naysaying was still going on in earnest.  As I said, every company needs to earn the respect. Comodo is relatively new and their AV has been quite buggy, though the firewall is getting there. Can't wait to see what v. 3 is. Nothing has been known about Melhi's integrity. The response was only natural. With you aboard, and as Comodo improves and becomes more well known I have no doubt that will happen.
--
Team Discovery
|
|
mers2
Premium,MVM
join:2004-03-20
USA
clubs:
·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to K McAleavey
You have MUCH more integrity than some of your former competitors - for which we are all extremely grateful.
And yes, the "nasties" are getting more evil than most imagined possible so I'm happy you'll have the time and money to fight the good fight. And more people will be able to protect themselves with BoClean being free.
--
Team Discovery
|
|
K McAleavey
Premium
join:2003-11-12
Voorheesville, NY
| reply to anonemouse
Whoops! Sticky fingers after too many hours once again ... you're correct ... I'm STILL trying to figure out how to pronounce his LAST name but am too embarassed to ask.
But the misspelling does help me to pronounce it properly to his face and I *really* like the guy and don't want to get that wrong too. Me needs sleep but dropped by and couldn't believe that all the naysaying was still going on in earnest.
--
Kevin McAleavey submissions@nsclean.com
»www.nsclean.com
Makers of BOClean |
|
anonemouse
@comcast.net | reply to K McAleavey
Hi Kevin,
Isn't is Melih not Mehli? |
|
