Given that Comodo activates for each user before that user can even begin to use XP, I really don’t see the practical difference. The only distinction I can see is that Comodo’s firewall runs for each logged-on user (the process “cfp.exe”), whereas the Windows Firewall isn’t listed as a separate process in Task Manager. And at the same time as the “Windows Firewall / ICS” system service, which runs in “Automatic” mode whether or not you’ve actually turned on the Windows Firewall. Not even when Comodo’s firewall is loaded as an XP background service before the Windows user interface appears, at the same time as anti-virus real-time scanning services. You’re suggesting that the built-in Windows Firewall provides a unique level of protection, one that no other product can create. Security Center will recognize, in real time, that either no, one (by name), or multiple firewalls are running. I normally use Comodo’s pre-security-suite firewall (v3.0.25.378). Why, then, would XP’s Security Center applet (and its linked XP Help Center topic) so strenously insist that one should not run multiple firewalls?Īs it did just now, when I temporarily re-activated Windows Firewall. You should NOT disable the Windows firewall as it protects your PC during the boot process before the third party firewall is loaded and initialized. Since XP SP2 and maybe SP1 (I can’t remember that far back), a properly written third party firewall will notify Windows when it is initialized and ready to take over for the Windows firewall. Disabling the Windows firewall is definitely the wrong move now.

Comodo vs windows firewall