lotsamosi's dashboard

lotsamosi replied on April 09, 2009 13:20 to the question "Definition Updates Failing" in Sunbelt Software:

Yesterday I downloaded the entire Vipre file because Vipre was uninstalled during the new update. So I already have the latest definitions.

lotsamosi replied on April 09, 2009 12:56 to the question "Definition Updates Failing" in Sunbelt Software:

I am having the same problem. I do have the latest definitions because I had to reinstall following yesterdays new version mess. Now if I check to see if there is an update, Vipre says the risk definitions update has failed.

lotsamosi replied on February 08, 2009 20:36 to the question "Vipre/Comodo conflict?" in Sunbelt Software:

Will this be fixed in the upcoming update?

lotsamosi replied on December 04, 2008 15:33 to the question "Vipre/Comodo conflict?" in Sunbelt Software:

Thanks for your help, hopefully comodo will fix it. As far as your part of the fix, will I have to wait for the next software update?

lotsamosi replied on December 04, 2008 03:23 to the question "Vipre/Comodo conflict?" in Sunbelt Software:

This is from the changelog for the latest version of CIS;
"FIXED! Defense+ does not prevent process access in memory".
Will this solve the problem I was having?

lotsamosi replied on November 21, 2008 02:56 to the question "Vipre/Comodo conflict?" in Sunbelt Software:

Here is what I found out at the Comodo forum.:

"Hi again
I've reproduced the issue. Actually Vipre hangs on trying to scan cfp.exe in memory. The problem could be resolved with adding cfp.exe to exclusion list but unfortunately Vipre scans the file anyway.
The only workaround I've found is to exit cfp.exe while scanning with Vipre. Or using some other anti-virus

As CIS works well with VIPRE, I assume that it's VIPRE problem with scanning protected files in memory. Anyway it would be easier for VIPRE developers to debug their scanner and see what happens during scanning CFP.exe".

lotsamosi replied on November 13, 2008 02:27 to the question "Vipre/Comodo conflict?" in Sunbelt Software:

Thanks for your help Nick. At least I can get a scan to finish. Hopefully you and/or Comodo can get the issue resolved at some point.
By the way, I did a complete scan tonight and it took 148 minutes compared to 80 before.

lotsamosi replied on November 12, 2008 22:14 to the question "Vipre/Comodo conflict?" in Sunbelt Software:

Yes I did. With the old version of Comodo a quick scan would be about 4 or 5 minutes and a deep scan about 80(with rootkit scan). With the new version, after I uninstalled the defense + it took 4 minutes without and 49 with the rootkit scanning. I haven't tried a deep scan yet.

lotsamosi replied on November 12, 2008 12:20 to the question "Vipre/Comodo conflict?" in Sunbelt Software:

A little more info: If I enable rootkit scanning Vipre takes 49 minutes to do a quick scan, without it a scan takes only 4 minutes.

lotsamosi replied on November 12, 2008 03:01 to the question "Vipre/Comodo conflict?" in Sunbelt Software:

I guess i just want assurance that Vipre's active protection is at least close to being as effective as Comodos Defense + is.
By the way, I did uninstall Defense + and was able to get a scan completed.

lotsamosi replied on November 11, 2008 15:42 to the question "Vipre/Comodo conflict?" in Sunbelt Software:

Thanks for the reply, I'll try uninstalling Comodo and reinstall without the antispyware. Is a fix being worked on? Also, is there a place I can see detailed information on the active protection? I guess I want to be sure it will protect as well as the Comodo will.

lotsamosi asked a question in Sunbelt Software on November 11, 2008 12:32:

Vipre/Comodo conflict?

I have been using Vipre for about a month and was very happy with it. I recently upgraded my Comodo firewall to Comodo Internet Security. Now I can't get Vipre to complete a scan. A quick scan that took 5 minutes will run for hours and never get past 60%. I have added Vipre to Comodos safe file list, I have disabled Comodos defence +(hips), even exited the firewall with the same results. I saw on another thread here that I should disable rootkit scanning to improve performance, but the quick scan never got past 8%. Any ideas what I should try next?