Jump to content

Comodo System Utilities is reporting the malware status of Malwarebytes services as unknown


Recommended Posts

Hello,

I thought I would bring this matter to the attention of the forum: I recently downloaded and installed Comodo System Utilities, and as soon as I used it, I noticed that the program lists the malware status of Malwarebytes services as unknown, which makes makes it look as though there is something wrong with Malwarebytes.

I have no concerns about Malwarebytes, so there is no need to reassure me that the program is okay. I'm only writing so that the appropriate people can be made aware of the issue and get it straightened out with Comodo.

I have already made a post on the Comodo forum about this issue, and this is what I wrote:

Hello,

I just downloaded the Comodo System Utilities program, and after playing around with it for a few moments, I am now completely turned off by Comodo and will never use any Comodo products ever again.

When I run the Autorun Manager module of the program, under Services, it says that the malware status of Malwarebytes and SUPERAntiSpyware is unknown!

It's so obvious what Comodo is attempting to do. Come on! Out of the dozens of services that I have running, the only two that the program is calling into question are the services of two of Comodo's competitors?! That's one of the cheapest tactics that I've ever seen. Comodo knows full well that there's nothing wrong with either of those two programs, so Comodo System Utilities should be showing them in green (clean), not as unknowns. It's nothing but an attempt by Comodo to make people doubt the products of their competitors, and it's pathetic.

A Comodo forum moderator then replied with the following:

This has nothing to do with the fact that they are competitors. All it means is that Malwarebytes and SuperAntiSpyware have updated since the last time they were whitelisted by hash. I'm sure they are trusted through the trusted files list in Comodo Internet Security. Thus, if you ran Comodo Internet Security they would be trusted anyway.

If you would like them to be trusted by hash, which is what CSU does, you should submit them in this topic.

Thank you.

And I responded to his reply with this:

Thanks for dropping in and addressing this issue. It's always nice to see a concern addressed by a moderator. That being said, I do have some issues with your response, though.

"This has nothing to do with the fact that they are competitors. All it means is that Malwarebytes and SUPERAntiSpyware have updated since the last time they were whitelisted by hash."

I have no idea how Comodo goes about creating their whitelists, and I have no idea what you meant by saying, "by hash," but regardless, Malwarebytes and SUPERAntiSpyware are two extremely popular programs, especially Malwarebytes. Malwarebytes has millions of users, and it's unfathomable to me that the developers in charge of Comodo System Utilities would not be able to keep the whitelist current for such an extremely popular program.

I have scores of services running on my computer, many of them very obscure, yet Comodo System Utilities is able to list them all as being clean, but strangely, it plays completely dumb when it comes to a very well respected program that's used by millions (i.e., Malwarebytes). If the developers have the data to list all of my obscure services as clean, then they certainly should have the data for one of the most popular programs around. So, no disrespect to you personally, but your explanation offered in defense of Comodo simply doesn't make any sense to me. It's a very weak excuse.

And furthermore, it gets worse: In my earlier post I reported that when I run the Autorun Manager module of the program, under Services, it says that the malware status of Malwarebytes and SUPERAntiSpyware is unknown, but I just played around with the program some more, and this time, I discovered that when I run the Autorun Manager, under Startup, it's actually showing SUPERAntiSpyware as being infected! This is totally unacceptable.

I don't know if there's any truth to the suspicions that I have about Comodo doing this on purpose to make people have doubts about some of their competitor's products, but if that isn't true, then the only other explanation is that the developers are asleep at the wheel. Either way, the situation isn't good, and it makes Comodo look very bad.

"If you would like them to be trusted by hash, which is what CSU does, you should submit them in this topic."

huh.gif

Hmm, I'm not really sure why that would be my job to do so. The Comodo developers get paid to make sure the programs work right, do they not? They should already be on this, not me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:welcome:

Malwarebytes' can't really do anything on this other then contact the developers. Also note that Malwarebytes'/Superantispyware are not competitors. They are both in entirely different areas of the security field. You'd think Comodo would know that.

On the rest I've had my own problems with Comodo's support. One thing I don't get is why they identify by hash when a more correct way is by valid digital signatures. They are a digital signature signing company after all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
Back to top
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This site uses cookies - We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.