News Symantec discusses Vista security... again

[Tim S]

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/07...ista_security/

[WarMachine]

Anyone else find it ironic that the makers of Norton software are pointing out flaws in someone else's?

[Da Dego]

Originally Posted by WarMachine

Anyone else find it ironic that the makers of Norton software are pointing out flaws in someone else's?

The irony was far from lost on me as I wrote that

[fev]

symantec need to piss off with there crap software and stop flaw spotting in beta oftware. Perhaps develop their own better?

[olly_lewis]

Vista is in a Beta and of course there are going to be holes, though not all of them will be filled when the software is released to the world, but XP and previous OS's have never been bug free, though Norton seem to be pointing their fingers at Vista and thinking that it matters and that we really care at this point in time... Though of course there is one way to fix this problem: Buy a high quality Symantec product...

[EQC]

It's an interesting story, really.

On the one hand, Symantec is helping out Microsoft to release a better product when the "final" release comes out.

On the other hand, Symantec is giving Microsoft some bad PR. Which is good for Symantec's business, since theyll compete directly with Microsoft in the AntiVirus space.

On the ?third? hand, by pointing out Microsoft's flaws early, Symantec reduces the need for Symantec Antivirus when Vista comes out, and in a sense shoots themself in the foot.

I can't really see "bad" in what Symantec is doing -- whether or not this is "Beta" software, it's unlikely any Beta Tester would have noticed the problem, so by Symantec pointing it out, the problem will get fixed. The only fault may be that Symantec pointed it out publicly (rather than privately to Mr. Gates), making themselves seem less altruistic.

And with regards to:

Originally Posted by article

his journalist is particularly skeptical of anyone who is selling you a $50 product to patch all the holes in the up-to-$400 product you just bought from them

Word!
Microsoft's trying to put Symantec out of business, when Symantec/Norton, in a way, may have made Windows more successful by solving all it's vulnerablity issues for the last X years. Would anybody have kept buying windows if there was no antivirus software for it? Perhaps Microsoft ought to thank Symantec and McAffee.

[Da Dego]

Originally Posted by EQC

And with regards to:

Word!
Microsoft's trying to put Symantec out of business, when Symantec/Norton, in a way, may have made Windows more successful by solving all it's vulnerablity issues for the last X years. Would anybody have kept buying windows if there was no antivirus software for it? Perhaps Microsoft ought to thank Symantec and McAffee.

Well, I half agree. I don't like it that they do that, but on the other hand after thinking about it I actually really am annoyed at Symantec's actions. You've not seen the last of my opinions on this...

[MiNiMaL_FuSS]

the fact that Symantec and McAffee are so big just points out how little the average computer user actually knows about security. They buy the big bulky brand, install it and leave it....then they wonder why they still get viruses after not configuring it properly.

Nod32 for me now and forever...flawless.

[DXR_13KE]

Nod32 ROCKS!!!!!!

as for Norton, it is the worse poison you can put on your PC, most of my friends computers had to be formated because of the Norton AV, that was scre*ing the network connection and was devouring the resources. it is like a big tank with big guns that can not move.

nod32 is a ballet dancer with a ion canon.

[mattthegamer463]

Symantec really have no place doing this, they should wait until the OS has been finalized before pointing out any flaws.

One question for Vista users. I tried out beta 1 a few months ago, and when I tried to install my McAfee Virusscan software it said it was an invalid application and wouldn't install it. Does this mean my virus protection software won't work in Vista, or was this just a beta bug or a random occurance? I'm a bit worried.

[fev]

means it was incompatable, just like most win9x anti-viri are with XP.

You'll need a new one if you goto vista.

[cpemma]

Originally Posted by DXR_13KE

...most of my friends computers had to be formated because of the Norton AV, that was screwing the network connection and was devouring the resources.

Originally Posted by MiNiMaL_FuSS

...then they wonder why they still get viruses after not configuring it properly.

Also applies to NAV and your friends' problems. Millions of people are using NAV quite happily. That's why it still sells - the market-place decides what's crap, not the fanboys. They used to say nobody got fired for buying IBM - nobody gets fired for buying NAV either.

And why shouldn't Norton blow their trumpet in public? They're showing possible customers they know their security stuff. Do you think McAfee and the others would have just quietly tipped off Redmond if they'd spotted the flaw first?

[DXR_13KE]

the interesting thing is that NAV on my friends computers usualy were updated and well configured, it slowed down the system, on a realy good computer, and would prevent you from using your network or changing it, even after uninstaling it, it would be still impossible to configure the network.

and this did not happen once, it has been allot of times, that i have gone to a friends or family home to fix a computer and see that it was being FUBAR'ed by NAV.

[EK-MDi]

Originally Posted by Symantec

Apparently, it is possible to escalate the user information via an ActiveX control from a website, which allows the website to install cookies and the like in administrator mode. According to Symantec, the machine can be taken over if the script is coded properly.

LOL, this trick would not work. The ActiveX code needs to have permission from the user to be installed in the first place. Wow, this just shows how desperate they're getting with their damage control due to Windows Vista's largely improved security.

[TheColdLord]

1 Norton products are "good"(read bulls**t). They eat away any resource you have not to mention that it isn't by far of any use. There are a load of bettter antiviruses, Bitdefender,Kaspersky...and of course Nod32. And with Kaspersky at its 6 version, I've heard quit a few good things about it. Well optimised and a low resource user +very eficient. Symantec shows of on a beta OS, not only for their own profit but to make it look Vista look cr*py(still don't know how it will work), wich they think will give them an edge.

And about the tinfoil hat...do it!!!

[Mr T]

I hate it when i go round to peoples houses to 'fix' their pcs only to find that norton systemworks or the like sold to them by mr security in pc world is running 10 thousand different services on their crappy old p800 and making it grind to a halt.

Personally i only use the windows firewall because at the end of the day who would want to hack me? Maybe they would want my photos? Who knows, its not like im a company with valuble data.

As for antivirus software i run nod32 as it seams to use next to zero resources.

The only symantec program ive use before is the corporate version of their virus scanner which seams to be way less bloaty.

[Tim S]

I'm quite happy using AVG - works a treat for me and seems to update far more often than Norton ever did.

[Cthippo]

I've never used an AV on any of my computers and I've caught exactly one virus, and I knew better at the time. The combination of unusual hardware, an uncommon OS and browser, using webmail exclusively and a hardware firewall seems to do the job. Well, that and not searching for "free screensavers"

[dire_wolf]

Originally Posted by DXR_13KE

nod32 is a ballet dancer with a ion canon.

Sig'd