madirish Premium Member join:2003-08-04 Cleveland, OH 1 edit
1 recommendation |
to K McAleavey
Re: Comodo acquires BOCleansaid by K McAleavey: "File scanning" was a waste of time (you're going to look for a problem ONLY when your machine is SO hosed you finally noticed?) ten years ago ... and what we offered was way ahead of its time THEN. As a "backup" to your AV which should have stopped it in the first place but obviously didn't (as many can attest from personal experience) ... this isn't the 80's anymore, it isn't even the 90's anymore. Hi Kevin.Are you saying that we should dump our AV,AT then and only use BOClean? Not trying to start anything-I just really want to know. edit:added "you" |
|
Name Game Premium Member join:2002-07-07 Grand Rapids, MI |
to K McAleavey
Good Decision. Best to you both my friend..glad you have the ability now to continue "flipping switches and circuit breakers" before the compressor get's up to speed ..big hugs to bingbong. |
|
Name Game 1 edit |
to madirish
said by madirish:said by K McAleavey: "File scanning" was a waste of time (you're going to look for a problem ONLY when your machine is SO hosed you finally noticed?) ten years ago ... and what we offered was way ahead of its time THEN. As a "backup" to your AV which should have stopped it in the first place but obviously didn't (as many can attest from personal experience) ... this isn't the 80's anymore, it isn't even the 90's anymore. Hi Kevin.Are you saying that we should dump our AV,AT then and only use BOClean? Not trying to start anything-I just really want to know. edit:added "you" No he did not..he said your AV should have stopped it and BOClean was then your back up. Many times the AV with it name type sigs..not updated fast enough missed many badboys in any real time protection..while BOClean then caught them. Kevin always advocated..keep your AV and AT..BOClean was your back up. |
|
madirish Premium Member join:2003-08-04 Cleveland, OH |
madirish
Premium Member
2007-Apr-3 4:17 pm
said by Name Game:said by madirish:said by K McAleavey: "File scanning" was a waste of time (you're going to look for a problem ONLY when your machine is SO hosed you finally noticed?) ten years ago ... and what we offered was way ahead of its time THEN. As a "backup" to your AV which should have stopped it in the first place but obviously didn't (as many can attest from personal experience) ... this isn't the 80's anymore, it isn't even the 90's anymore. Hi Kevin.Are you saying that we should dump our AV,AT then and only use BOClean? Not trying to start anything-I just really want to know. edit:added "you" No he did not..he said your AV should have stopped it and BOClean was then your back up. Many times the AV with it name type sigs..not updated fast enough missed many badboys in any real time protection..while BOClean then caught them. Kevin always advocated..keep your AV and AT..BOClean was your back up. Thanks NG but I wanted Kevin to reply (no offense to you)-cause I also wanted to ask him about Heuristics |
|
Name Game Premium Member join:2002-07-07 Grand Rapids, MI |
said by madirish:Thanks NG but I wanted Kevin to reply (no offense to you)-cause I also wanted to ask him about Heuristics I do not take offense..not even to a question as yours..but now you do have the answer..and if you go to the Privacy Software Corporation site you will read the same. So now ask the specific question you have in mind about heuristics. |
|
K McAleavey Premium Member join:2003-11-12 Voorheesville, NY
1 recommendation |
to madirish
Heh. Nah, this mad Irishman will be the first to tell you that BOClean is merely another continuation of the SAME problem as the AV's and all the other "anti-whatevers" ... the ONE thing that made us different from the rest was that I didn't even BOTHER with a "scanner" in our design because if everyone shares the same signature-based mentality and went for the file system, and the ONLY difference between one file scanner and another was how quickly a signature got added (and we did well there) then why (aside from a couple of day's time) would you expect US to find a new variant when whatever you were using didn't either? In OUR design, we didn't really bother with the file system since if the AV missed it, we probably would have too ... we went for the kernel and system memory. And in the past few years, some others have seen our wisdom and adopted it as well in THEIR stuff. What TRULY made us different was that instead of just grabbing some random strings and made signatures out of them, we took the trouble to actually LEARN our opponents and concentrated on *their* unique traits. That's what allowed us to anticipate their next move and those things they wouldn't change. For all the sheer volume of nasties, there really aren't all THAT many "hired guns" out there writing malware. If there's 200 total, I'd be impressed. But the various authors who do this are pretty consistent in their METHODS and that's what BOClean concentrated on. Same dewd who wrote Gromozon, VXGames, Zlobs, DollarRevenues and Cabanieris is the exact same dewd who wrote "STORM" recently. I believe his name is Yuri and he's in Ukraine. Does things that have ALWAYS been consistent for analysts who bothered to spot the configuration problem in his compiler once you remove the randomizers he uses to fool file scanners and break the QWAP out of "generic unpackers" used by the Anti's ... but in MEMORY his stuff is always the same and it's been going on for three years now. So SHOULD you dump your AV, AT, A-hole, whatever? Not yet ... but thanks to Mehli and COMODO, the day when I will actually ENCOURAGE that isn't very far away ... COMODO has a firewall and some VERY talented folks ... and the SOLUTION is going to be in the 3 version of COMODO's firewall. And then ... it'll get EVEN BETTER! I've been hired up to make COMODO's AV better, I'll be in charge of that. BOClean will be a standalone as always, and it will be in the AV which will give me file hooks we never had. But the whole purpose of this is SOLELY to assuage the mindset that you've got to scan for files and be a bit more successful at that. But the bottom line is, why let them get infected in the FIRST place? OK, so what I bring is a mop and a pail to add to all this since that's what people have come to expect since the 80's. Like I said though, we're going to turn the world on its ear with what's already in the pipe. And then we collectively "get serious" about it from there. I have SEEN the future, and it's going to be a whole lot better than it is now. |
|
mers2 Premium Member join:2004-03-20 USA |
to K McAleavey
said by K McAleavey: What we always WANTED to do (but were bogged down supporting this 1980's mentality and 1990's mentality) was to PREVENT nasties from ever happening in the first place. So now, with COMODO taking us and our stuff in, we can continue our faith with those who gave us money AND we can now finally turn our focus to things nobody else has even considered doing ... I'm serious here ... the BEST is YET to come! And nobody got hurt ... aside from *US* ... Kevin, Thanks for replying here. You'll have to understand the negativity towards Comodo as they are relatively new - and unlike yourself, have yet to prove themselves. Only a natural response when a valuable, trusted product gets sold to a company not really known. I think you and Nancy quieted a lot of that with assurances you are still behind the product and are vouching for Comodo. You and Nancy have provided an excellent product with outstanding service for years. Many thanks and best wishes for the future. Comodo better keep it's word, or it will have a lot of us who love BoClean and care about you and Nancy to answer to. |
|
madirish Premium Member join:2003-08-04 Cleveland, OH |
to K McAleavey
said by K McAleavey: Heh. Nah, this mad Irishman will be the first to tell you that BOClean is merely another continuation of the SAME problem as the AV's and all the other "anti-whatevers" I never used your product and I just wanted to ask you some simple questions-things I didn't understand,I had gotten interested in BOClean from this thread-thanks anyway and good luck. |
|
StraitShootWho Loves Ya Baby? - Theo Kojak Premium Member join:2003-02-08 Clinton, MA |
to K McAleavey
said by K McAleavey:I've been hired up to make COMODO's AV better, I'll be in charge of that. Hell it needs it! Comodo's AV was very weak and what a memory hog! I'll be watching this baby like a hawk,... |
|
|
K McAleavey Premium Member join:2003-11-12 Voorheesville, NY |
to mers2
Comodo HAS a BOClean forum now - sorry I haven't even had time to open an account there where I *work* ... heh. My FIRST order of business is working with a crew of VERY talented analysts who have AMAZED me in their ability to grasp what I've taught them *SO* quickly ... I'm expecting that somewhere by this coming weekend, I'll not need to be doing that anymore, they're THAT capable now that they've learned my tricks. And that will be a GREAT burden off my shoulders after all these years! But I'd encourage people to go over there, and say what you're saying here and on Wilders and elsewhere. Nancy and I would have NEVER done this were it not for the fact that Mehli has demonstrated to us the sincerity of HIS commitment and that of an absolutely WONDERFUL bunch of people he's surrounded himself with before he ever talked to us. I've listened to the concerns of others before stepping into there and he's satisfactorily explained each and every question to me and Nancy. Lemme put it to you THIS way ... if any of this was about MONEY, I was offered *multiple* six figures by 180 solutions and a few of the "Russkies" with all nancy and I know to write rootkits, burden people with malware and get RICH doing so. It would have been WAY too easy if that was where we were at. And just got ANOTHER offer just yesterday to "go over to the dark side" ... for all some of our competitors have raised as bogus issues about my "morals" in years past, proof is in the pudding and ten years of it. I *starved* (quite literally) doing what I've been doing. And while I won't be rich doing what I'm going to be doing, at least I will be able to sleep at night (for a change, heh) KNOWING that I'll be continuing to keep my word (same for Nancy) and neither of us will have to worry about stab wounds in the middle of the night either. COMODO has actually been around for almost as long as PSC has, just doing different things. Now that they're making some money, Mehli has the opportunity to SPEND some of that doing what WE believe in. If WE were still making money like we did in the 90's, we'd be doing the SAME thing out of gratitude for having money to do it with. The problems with the net are unfortunately the result of people having little or no protection on their machines in the first place. And having LESS of a clue. What's got US psyched is that if BOClean and the other things we've had to sit on owing to lack of time can be given away for free and COMODO can attract corporate money in what they otherwise do, then it's truly win-win for everyone. THAT feels GOOD after all we've been through the past few years! But should COMODO break their promise (no worries about it here) then I am outta there in a heartbeat ... yeah, they bought our reputation but I can't reveal what other morsels they've bought that we were stuck sitting on the past couple of years owing to the inability to find the time to develop it. Read Mehli's comments once again ... THIS is the big promise ... all that undone code will FINALLY get done and it is every bit as significant as what BOClean meant in 1997. Better stop lest it start smelling like potted meat ... but compare where we've ended up compared to my good friend and colleague Uncle Wayne and TDS ... compare to what's left of "The Cleaner" ... THEY were our "competitors" back when we started and we were ALL close friends. No room or interest in "cut-throat" back then, there was WORK to be done that the biggies weren't doing. And what was ALL of our collective rewards? Ask a brontosaurus. And what's left today now among those we leave behind for a better solution? Same old, same old. Nah, this is another century ... it DESERVES a better answer. |
|
fatdcuk Premium Member join:2005-02-20 England |
to K McAleavey
Hey Kev First off congratulations for seeking to better your software and now best of all making it free so it will be more widely used and protect many more folks on the WWW You mention Yuri and his bots,glad you've been all over his creations with a size 12 stomp but what i am curious to know is how long before BOC can whoop PE386's A,B and C Rustock's ? Yuri's creation's as of yet do not bypass software firewalls,Rustock dose and as such represent a bigger security risk should they become more widespread. I mentioned it before but can't help that Yuri's freinds missed a trick putting out Wincom32 and not Rustock B as the dropped bot,although admittebly there are still so many victims out there still backdoored by it Anyhows all the best in your new lab and where can i send new specimens for your inspection once the free version has been released ? |
|
K McAleavey Premium Member join:2003-11-12 Voorheesville, NY |
THANKS, guy! I know we've both been on opposite sides of reality and I'll be the first to admit that with so MUCH malware and me being the only one left to do all of the work the past many months, BOClean has been forced to languish as a result of no time for code. There was a LOT of good kernel code that I never had time to complete and for now, first thing we do is some minor imrpovements to 4.22 for release as COMODO BOClean 4.23 in order to honor the change. Once all of this malware analysis is off my butt, FIRST order of business is to finish so much code I'd started only to never have the time to finish. As soon as that's done we'll finally HAVE our "5.0" that we never had a chance to do. And once THAT'S done, COMODO's AV will become like BOClean ... but one thing done properly at a time. Look to COMODO's firewall, BOClean's lost cookies will be in there probably before it hits the AV ... so many things in a state of flux, so little time. While we were shopping around looking for money to keep BOClean lit, we showed a number of other companies a very rudimentary bit of code where a piece of the future BOClean came up before the kernel itself. But knowing that if those we showed it to didn't buy us or fund us, they'd have the rosetta stone itself. Now that belongs to COMODO who got to see the ENTIRE code of what WE code-named "ROOTO" ... heh. Pity there's so many hosers in this "business" who couldn't see beyond their same old tired tactics and "me too, AV's do this, this is the ONLY way to go." 4.23 will not be THAT much of an improvement. Once I don't have to do malware anymore, THEN we fire off the afterburners and that should be done in a couple of months or less. I'd rather put the serious stuff into what's already a winner, COMODO's firewall for now and then bring that AV up to something that will embarass Eugene. Sorry, but Yuri's compiler is STILL broken ... if you KNOW what to look for. (grin) |
|
|
to K McAleavey
Hi Kevin,
Isn't is Melih not Mehli? |
|
K McAleavey Premium Member join:2003-11-12 Voorheesville, NY
1 recommendation |
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. |
|
mers2 Premium Member join:2004-03-20 USA |
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. |
|
mers2 |
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. |
|
dadkinsCan you do Blu? MVM join:2003-09-26 Hercules, CA 1 edit |
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. |
|
K McAleavey Premium Member join:2003-11-12 Voorheesville, NY
1 recommendation |
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. |
|
dadkinsCan you do Blu? MVM join:2003-09-26 Hercules, CA 4 edits
1 recommendation |
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... |
|
richter35 Premium Member join:2004-01-03 Croatia 1 edit
2 recommendations |
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 doesnt scan everything it moves, but rather that it should jump in when its really necessary, keeping resource load on minimum and nourishing the approach dont get infected in the first place. All that is excellent and totally understandable.
The thing is that were 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 customers 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, Im not asking these questions
Im 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 cant but thats 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. Im 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. Dont 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 its light and its great to protect system, its 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, its just a matter of time who gets it first.
I may be totally wrong and I know most will disagree which is irrelevant as were 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 Ill 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 Im not competent to discuss its detection abilities) is rather narrow, AVs arent 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 its 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 Im 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 dont 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 Im 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 dont 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 wont, and taking into consideration most people dont get infected with uber new just coded 5 minutes ago malware is rather unlikely makes BOClean
somewhat redundant, IMO. I know Ill 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 Ive 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 dont. 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 its redundant, its 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. Its just like with a supercar. Why do you need a car that can go 400km/h when you cant 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 wont.
*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. |
|
|
Howyoudoing to rotty97
Anon
2007-Apr-4 12:58 am
to rotty97
Re: Comodo acquires BOCleanI'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! |
|
|
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?? |
|
psicopMore human than human Premium Member join:2005-12-21 Australia
1 recommendation |
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. |
|
1 recommendation |
morgan edge to rotty97
Anon
2007-Apr-4 4:24 am
to rotty97
Hey Comodo guys, can you buy NOD32 next so I can get free copy of that too? Now that would be kewl. |
|
|
out yet to rotty97
Anon
2007-Apr-9 4:08 pm
to rotty97
So is the free Comodo BOClean out yet? |
|
1 edit |
Be1ge
Member
2007-Apr-9 4:31 pm
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. |
|
BuddelIf it ain't broke, don't fix it. Premium Member join:2004-03-06 EU |
to morgan edge
said by morgan edge :
Hey Comodo guys, can you buy NOD32 next ... I do hope this will never happen. |
|
dadkinsCan you do Blu? MVM join:2003-09-26 Hercules, CA |
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? |
|
BuddelIf it ain't broke, don't fix it. Premium Member join:2004-03-06 EU
1 recommendation |
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... |
|
|
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 |
|