Comodo Internet Security Premium 5.0
Comodo Internet Security Premium 5.0 review: Effective at blocking new malware
- Effective at blocking new malware, includes a firewall
- Inconsistent overall malware detection
Comodo Internet Security Premium did a good job at blocking brand-new malware and has a firewall, but its inconsistent overall detection performance makes it tough to recommend.
Best Deals (Selling at 1 store)
Comodo Internet Security Premium did a very good job at blocking brand-new malware in our tests. Its detection of known malware was less impressive, though.
Comodo Internet Security is reasonably well designed and easy to use. Its installer takes several more steps than is becoming the norm for antivirus software, but it was perfectly usable otherwise. Once it's installed, you'll be greeted by a well laid out Summary screen that uses the familiar green/yellow/red status indicators for your PC's protection status, although some of the wording could have been better. The scan window, however, doesn’t give any indication as to its status--no progress bar, nothing--so you'll be somewhat in the dark as to how long you'll have to wait for scans to complete.
Unlike many free products, Comodo Internet Security has a firewall--thus the product's "Internet Security" moniker. We didn't test the effectiveness of the firewall, however.
Internet Security Premium's malware detection and blocking is a mixed bag. Its 92.4 percent detection rate in traditional scanner-based detection tests--which indicate how well a product can identify known malware--was the lowest score of any product we looked at. In addition, Comodo missed several samples in what's known as the WildList test. This test by itself isn't a good measure of an antivirus product's effectiveness--we don't include it in our scoring for this reason--but any security product worth its salt should be able to detect all its samples.
It also did a middling job at cleaning up infections on a test PC: It detected all test infections, and removed active components of malware infections 60 percent of the time, in a tie for the lowest score among the free antivirus products we reviewed. That said, no product we looked at achieved higher than an 80 percent removal rate.
False positives was another concern: Internet Security Premium tied with Avira AntiVir Personal for the most false positives (six) in traditional malware detection, and it was the only product among the antivirus packages we tested to flag safe files as possibly malicious in dynamic malware detection tests (dynamic malware detection technology attempts to identify malware based solely on how it behaves--a good way of identifying brand-new malware for which no signature file exists). While as a percentage, the number of false positives is low, even one false positive can cause problems.
Despite this issue, Comodo Internet Security Premium did an excellent job at blocking brand-new malware. In tests for blocking real, live malware, Comodo completely blocked 96 percent of attacks, and partially blocked the other 4 percent. No other product was able to fully block more than 80 percent of new malware attacks.
Scan speeds were a mixed bag as well. Its on-demand scan speed (how long it takes to scan 4.5GB of data for malware in an manually initiated scan) of 2 minutes, 9 seconds was solid, though it trailed the fastest scan time of 87 seconds. An on-access scan of 4.5GB of data took 5 minutes, 4 seconds, which was slightly longer than the average. The on-access scan test determines how quickly a product can scan files as they're opened or saved to disk.
In other speed tests, Comodo Internet Security Premium had a relatively slight impact on PC performance. It added less than 1 second to startup times when compared to a PC with no antivirus software installed, though some file copy and download tests took longer than the average for the products we tested.
Comodo Internet Security Premium is by no means a bad product, but its mixed detection scores make it hard to recommend. It may be worth considering on the strength of its detection of brand new malware, but you can find security products that are more well rounded.
Join the Good Gear Guide newsletter!
Most Popular Reviews
- 1 Playing chicken with a Tesla Model S
- 2 Audi TT (2015) review: A smarter take on the sports coupe
- 3 Microsoft Lumia 640 review: Honouring Nokia's legacy
- 4 Apple Watch review: saving time
- 5 Samsung SUHD smart TV (JS9500) review
Deals on Good Gear Guide
- Networking, Wireless & VoIP
Deals on Good Gear Guide
Latest News Articles
- How encryption keys could be stolen by your lunch
- Vulnerability found in Samsung smartphone keyboard
- Mac users exposed by zero-day vulnerability
- Breaking Bad-themed crypto-ransomware hits Australian computers
- Microsoft wants to kill passwords with biometric authentication in Windows 10
GGG Evaluation Team
First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.
For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.
The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.
The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.
My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.