another reason why norton sucks

[kleinma]

So one of my customers is having a problem downloading our setup file from our site because norton has flagged it as "WS.Reputation.1" which is something Norton calls "reputation scoring". Instead of being vigilant about virus definitions, and looking for virus like behavior, Norton takes a different route of considering everything a virus unless tons of their users also run the software and have said it is not. Or as a developer you can submit your software to them to get white listed (yeah right). I would rather invest my time explaining to people how they just flushed 40-60 bucks down the toilet for software that doesn't stop real viruses while it does a great job blocking legit downloads. Our setup file is friggin code signed from a global certificate authority, how many viruses have you gotten that had a digital signature? Luckily, the work around is easy, you just go into "add/remove progams" and click uninstall on Norton. Problem solved

[NickThissen]

Luckily, the work around is easy, you just go into "add/remove progams" and click uninstall on Norton. Problem solved

If only it were that easy. If something is trying to remove Norton, it must be a virus! So I'm too afraid to remove Norton, it might put me in quarantine!

[pcuser]

Don't eat yellow snow and don't buy software in yellow boxes...

[Quiver318]

I gave up on them in 2002 when I was trying to repair a corrupt installation of their firewall; the firewall would not start. Brilliantly, the uninstaller refused to work unless the firewall was actually running.

Translation: Could not repair software unless software already functional!

[honeybee]

I thought Norton sucked because he enjoyed it!


Seriously, do you blame Norton when every other antivirus/firewall software wants to give their users a sense of security by flagging some or the other content to contain various trojans and malwares?

Maybe you should tie up with Norton instead of spending money for a digital certificate.

.

[capsulecorpjx]

So one of my customers is having a problem downloading our setup file from our site because norton has flagged it as "WS.Reputation.1" which is something Norton calls "reputation scoring". Instead of being vigilant about virus definitions, and looking for virus like behavior, Norton takes a different route of considering everything a virus unless tons of their users also run the software and have said it is not. Or as a developer you can submit your software to them to get white listed (yeah right). I would rather invest my time explaining to people how they just flushed 40-60 bucks down the toilet for software that doesn't stop real viruses while it does a great job blocking legit downloads. Our setup file is friggin code signed from a global certificate authority, how many viruses have you gotten that had a digital signature? Luckily, the work around is easy, you just go into "add/remove progams" and click uninstall on Norton. Problem solved

I disagree, I think Edward Norton is a great actor.

[visualAd]

Virus scanners are a great example of trying to fix user incompetance and laziness with a technical solution.

[Siddharth Rout]

No offence but I have been using Norton for the last 6 years and I am very happy about it...

[visualAd]

offence taken

[GaryMazzone]

I dopped them in 2003, I askually paid to the the year subcription and it would not update the virus defs... When I called tech support their suggestion was just uninstall and reinstall Norton... It might fix the problem... My solution was I'll uninstall get my money back and install Avast.

[Siddharth Rout]

2004-05-06 versions were good. 2007 and 2008 versions were really sad. They really made my computer slow but after that I never had a problem. I really like 2009 but 2010 is excellent.

I have been experimenting with viruses/trojans/malware now for more than 4 years so I know there are plenty of of them which Norton catches but other AV's don't.

[JuggaloBrotha]

I dopped them in 2003, I askually paid to the the year subcription and it would not update the virus defs... When I called tech support their suggestion was just uninstall and reinstall Norton... It might fix the problem... My solution was I'll uninstall get my money back and install Avast.

I gave up on McAfee in 2005 for similar reasons and I didn't go with Norton because of those similar reasons.

[I_Love_My_Vans]

I've used them before and had no problems... but them I'm not an idiot.

We had one customer who managed to screw their computer up so much Norton was putting it's own files into quarantine, it soon filled up the hard drive and cause a BSOD, apparently the user said they had recently defragged the machine so there's no way anything could have possibly gone wrong!

*facepalm*

[Quiver318]

...Norton was putting it's own files into quarantine....

Yes. "Quarantine Yourself" is the type of logic I have come to expect from Symantec. But when Norton products were still owned by Peter Norton, I used to admire their work.

[kleinma]

2004-05-06 versions were good. 2007 and 2008 versions were really sad. They really made my computer slow but after that I never had a problem. I really like 2009 but 2010 is excellent.

I have been experimenting with viruses/trojans/malware now for more than 4 years so I know there are plenty of of them which Norton catches but other AV's don't.

Aside from software development, I operate a computer repair shop. When a computer has a virus on it that comes to me, I would say out of 10 machines

3 have no AV
3 have McAfee
3 have Norton
1 has other AV (CA, AVG, avira, etc)

[Siddharth Rout]

That is a fair enough expectation...

Perhaps Norton needs to market their product even more vigorously...

2 have no AV
7 have Norton
1 has other AV (CA, AVG, avira, etc)

[kregg]

So Norton has this thing where users say a software is safe as long as it is white-listed by it's users? Couldn't a gang of malicious coders exploit this in some way?

Either way, I've been using Windows antivirus and firewall free since (roughly) 7 years ago, and I've yet to get any problems. I agree with VisualAd with antivirus software being the incompetency solution.

[Psyrus]

Norton is artificially bumping up their new software sales numbers. The last time I had to resubscribe for virus definitions they told me it would cost $49.99 while to upgrade to the latest and greatest would cost $59.99. New software for another $10 seems logical. Is there really only a $10 difference between their virus definitions and their new software? I dumped them a few years ago. I currently use AVG but I am always looking for a better alternative. Is Avast good?

[si_the_geek]

I used AVG until a few months ago when I got a new PC with Windows 7 64 bit. It had some kind of problem during installing or setting up (can't remember the details), so I tried Avast.

So far Avast seems better than AVG, but it is hard to be sure because I have a different PC and OS etc. As yet it hasn't found any viruses, but it has blocked a few malicious web pages (in IE and Firefox) that I've tried to check as part of my moderator duties.

[GaryMazzone]

I've been using it for a few years now and have not seen any issues. It has caught viruses on the way in in email and Trojans also

[baja_yu]

I have Avast on about 6-7 Windows machines. Pretty satisfied with it.

[JuggaloBrotha]

I use AVG, it's been good to me.

[Pradeep1210]

I use AVG (free edition) at home and QuickHeal in office.

[MaximilianMayrhofer]

I've been using Microsoft Security Essentials and a weekly Anti-Malware Bytes scan on my 32-bit Windows 7 Professional and it works beautifully.

[Shaggy Hiker]

How is 'works beautifully' defined? Does it always catch something, or does it always find nothing, or does it just look nice? Frankly, either of the first two is negative data. Sometimes it's better to just shut up and look pretty. Unfortunately, since I can't do the latter, there isn't much point in the former.

[kleinma]

I've been using Microsoft Security Essentials and a weekly Anti-Malware Bytes scan on my 32-bit Windows 7 Professional and it works beautifully.

This is my setup as well, and I too would say it "works beautifully"

Meaning MSE updates as part of windows update, MSE doesn't try to sell you any bells and whistles version of the free product because there is no paid version. It has a nice simple interface, and just works well, and catches just about everything.

I have a guys PC in here right now that has Norton Internet Security 2010, and he had a virus that it could not get rid of. He even paid for the symantec service techs to connect to his machine and try to clean it out, and they couldnt and gave him his money back. So he brought it to me, and I scanned it with MSE, and it found a rootkit hooked into ipsec.sys and was able to clean the file, and now all is well.

Oh, and there also is that little matter of every major AV product except for MSE being at risk of kernel hook attacks.

http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/new...ook-attack.ars

http://arstechnica.com/security/news...-practical.ars

[JuggaloBrotha]

Hmm, I am due for a reformat and install of windows, I just might get to that soon and instead of installing avg next time I'll try mse.

[kleinma]

Honestly, I deal with a lot of viruses and a lot of peoples computers in various different configurations. MSE is really a shining star, and I know its hard to swallow something like "Microsoft made a good security product" but they really did this time. (Don't forget, they had the horror that was OneCare to get things right).

[TheBigB]

Instead of being vigilant about virus definitions, and looking for virus like behavior, Norton takes a different route of considering everything a virus unless tons of their users also run the software and have said it is not.

Some people really need that.
They should crap in their pants of all the virus warnings they get, so that they'll never use a computer again.
And at some point the universe might stop creating bigger and better idiots and we might get somewhere with the software industry

[baja_yu]

Well, medicine and technology are to blame for that. They have almost completely wiped out natural selection, so instead of having the idiots die out they reproduce and the 'idiot' genes keep propagating.

You're stupid, you get killed/eaten, you're weak and prone to illness, you die. That's how it used to be. Mmale kangaroos for example fight when it's mating season, and only the strongest male gets to reproduce with all the female kangaroos so only the strongest genes are transferred to the offspring. Fortunately it's not like that with humans. If it was I'd probably get to have sex never, and maybe not even then.