2008-11-29

2008-12-1

2008-12-01 (Comodo Internet Security scored 90% and took 2nd place): Thank you for testing our product. We are happy to report that the bug identified during your tests is fixed. Egemen TAS,
Sr. Research Scientist,
COMODO
何解?comodo花钱买名声?
对照2次PDF,发现由failed 转为 passed的有如下项目 kill1, kill2, kill3b, SSS2, kill3e, SSS3, kill5。
大家可以参看http://bbs.kafan.cn/thread-378425-1-1.html 30号官方在29日测试后做出的回应,上述除了kill 1, kill2外,其他几个经comodo官方测核实为 M测试人员错误(432版可以通过的),所以这次修改某种程度上来说为测试方纠正自己的问题,并非comodo迅速“堵漏”,然后拿updated version和人家旧版本比。
这是测试方的声明:
“We have received a suggestionfrom Comodo Security Solutions, Inc., the vendor of Comodo InternetSecurity, on how to improve the configuration of their product in orderto pass more tests. The suggested change included switching ComodoInternet Security configuration to "COMODO - Proactive Security", whichcan be done via the product's tray icon. Since our rules say that thetests are performed aginst the highest usable security configuration,we retested Comodo Internet Security 3.5.55810.432 and corrected itsresults. Its new score is 90%, which is much better score thanpreviously published incorrect value of 84%. We apologize to Comodo andall our visitors for this mistake.”
其中Kill3f未通过的原因,是cassurf会被终结......众所周知后者是干嘛的:buffer overflow, 本次测试中有这项吗?被终结会影响antileak的结果吗?但是它被认定为CIS的组件,一样扣分... 不装这个组件而用CMF代替的用户肯定分数更高
这也说明comodo的官方确实很认真的验证了测试,审视发现自己的不足。如果别的产品核实后,发现自己的测试也有误,我相信FWC测试小组一定也会更正的。
[ 本帖最后由 heartao 于 2008-12-1 20:22 编辑 ] |