T
Tom
opinions please...Tom
V
Virus Guy
Tom said:
Get a copy of NAV or NSW 2002 and use that instead. It's still
supported by Symantec via live-update.
AdAware, Spybot, and a good hosts file are (combined) are probably
better protection than NAV by itself. If you add NAV to that mix, and
use if for incoming e-mail scanning, then you've almost got a perfect
system (relatively speaking). If you connect to the internet through
a NAT router, and use FireFox for a browser, then you're almost at a
perfect system. The final step is combine the whole ball of wax with
Windows 98se.
C
* * Chas
Extreme bloatware.Tom said:
Look at NOD32, F-Prot or some of the other smaller AV programs that NG
members recommend.
If you have to have NAV, look for NAV 2002. It can be updated to
probably work as well as the latest versions with less intrusive
subscription verification "features'.
Chas.
P
Poster 60
* * Chas said:
Only if you use the preconfigured setup when you install it. I have
customized the extension box and changed the setting to "smartscan"
instead of "comprehensive" scanning. I am using NAV 2004 on one system
(included with new computer) and it works fine.
The 2006 version system requirements say 256 ram for memory. With all
the extensions they put into their scanner, I can see why.
I am using Nod32 also on another system and it is very good. Would I
recommend NOD32 before Norton? YES!
T
Todd H.
Tom said:
Avoid like plague.
W
WeatherGuy
Tom said:
Tom:
I have used Norton System Works 2004(including AV) for several years along
with Ghost 3.0 for backup. It does a very good job and doesn't seem to slow
my system down.
Mike
T
Todd H.
Let me qualify this now thatI have more time.
I support a variety of folks using a variety of different anti-virus
solutions. Norton and McAffee are the only ones that have given me
headaches. And Norton has been there happily humming along on system
after system that I've cleaned substantial malware infections off of.
I did not to a complete forensic analysis on these systems, but given
that NAV is a market leader, I suspect the malware writers know how to
get around that anti-virus program before they'd bother writing code
to get around other less popular ones. It's never good to be among
the low hanging fruit, if you will.
That said, I use the corporate edition of SAV 9 and haven't had any
problems with it. Then again, the corporate edition doesn't have any
of the utterly annoying and frustrating licensing/activation BS that
has caused me no end of headaches in supporting legitimate, licensed
users of their consumer security suite. Live update issues, license
issues, etc.
Another thing to factor in is "what email client do you use?" If you
use Mozilla Thunderbird, there are known problems with
Norton/Symantec and McAffee with that mailer.
I've recently jumped over to NOD32 for folks with Thunderbird and have
been quite impressed with its performance thus far.
Basically, if you have a choice and are buying new, you can get
better virus protection for less money and less headache if you choose
nearly anything but Norton/Symantec.
Best Regards,
W
WeatherGuy
Todd H. said:
As I have said, I have used NAV for years - never had a virus infection, a
headache with the software or performance issues. I use OE and IE with Win
XP SP 2 which I always keep fully patched. can't beat it for under $100 CDN
per year.
Why would my experience be so different from yours?
T
Todd H.
WeatherGuy said:
Good question. Perhaps the friends whose computers I maintain are
maniacs. I'm not sure.
If it works for you go for it. But anyone who looks at posting
history regarding live update issues and activation issues and such
will find that it's not at all unusual for people to have major
problems with Norton crap. Believe me, I've been on those boards a
good deal trying to fix these friends' machines!
Best Regards,
R
Robert Baer
"Update issues" - I found it utterly impossible to get so-calledTodd said:
"Live Update" to work in either Win98SE or Win2K, and Norton/Symantec
told me to teturn it for my money - that they WOULD NOT fix the problem.
As a result, for a number of -->years<-- i have been downloading
their so-called "Intelligent Updater" for free.
When the loaded AV prog runs low on time, i merely un-install it and
re-install it.
Registration? Print it out and do not mail.
My attitude is if they refuse to support their program, then i refuse
to vote with my money!
And yes, NAV ignores a fair amount of junk (even old crap), and looks
like that is never going to go away.
R
Ron Lopshire
Robert said:
When I got my new WinXP HE box, it had NAV on it. The "Intelligent
Updater" never worked, and when I tried to update manually, NAV
crashed. The only solution was to re-install NAV. You can't do that
with an OEM version (which I paid for), you can only restore the
original disk image. I dumped NAV and went with AVG until I purchased KAV.
The number one reason that I would never recommend NAV with WinXP,
though, is that NAV can only be updated by a User with full Admin
privileges. IMO, routine surfing of the internet with full Admin
privileges on WinXP is ignorant. I won't let my wife do that on my
WinXP box, let alone my kids and grandkids. YMMV.
Ron
A
Art
Disgusting! I wonder how many other av products are designed that
way.
Yep.
Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg
W
WeatherGuy
Art said:
Why should I not surf as an Administrator? My system is locked down, I am
the only user, and I have (in large part due to Norton) never had a virus or
other malware. Of course, i practice safe hex - I guess many don't
A
Art
Why should I not surf as an Administrator? My system is locked down, I am
the only user, and I have (in large part due to Norton) never had a virus or
other malware. Of course, i practice safe hex - I guess many don't
But if NAV's realtime monitor has saved your butt, that implies you're
doing something wrong. Some of us use no realtime av and never take
hits.
Basically, by running as Admin, you're throwing out much of the
advantage that the NT based OS have over the DOS based OS.
When typical users take hits, the damage can be more extensive
running that way.
If you are prone to taking hits, I suggest replacing NAV with KAV.
But better yet, learn what you're doing wrong and correct it.
Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg
K
kurt wismer
WeatherGuy wrote:
[snip]
you practice *some* safe hex, but if you're browsing as an
administrator, you're leaving some things out...
why shouldn't you surf as an administrator? google up the principle of
least privileges and realize that no matter how locked down your system
may be, it's never going to be completely invulnerable...
[snip]
Why should I not surf as an Administrator? My system is locked down, I am
the only user, and I have (in large part due to Norton) never had a virus or
other malware. Of course, i practice safe hex - I guess many don't
you practice *some* safe hex, but if you're browsing as an
administrator, you're leaving some things out...
why shouldn't you surf as an administrator? google up the principle of
least privileges and realize that no matter how locked down your system
may be, it's never going to be completely invulnerable...
O
Offbreed
WeatherGuy said:Why should I not surf as an Administrator? My system is locked down, I am
the only user, and I have (in large part due to Norton) never had a virus or
other malware. Of course, i practice safe hex - I guess many don't
You figure you are smarter than all the virus writers and hackers in the
world?
I've been reading about how even an OpenBSD administrator ran into
trouble with a hacker. His summation was to be thankful he was running
as a user on OpenBSD.
If you are using Windows and running as Administrator, you are trailing
your feet in shark infested waters.
T
Todd H.
WeatherGuy said:
These two statements are paradoxical I'm afraid.
I am the only user, and I have (in large part due to Norton) never
had a virus or other malware. Of course, i practice safe hex - I
guess many don't
The problem is that if any of the internet facing software you run is
exploited (by known, or future vulnerabilities), the malware will be
executed with Administrator privs rather than plain user privs.
If you do most of your day to day stuff as joe user, and escalate to
administrator only for things that require admin privs
(e.g. isntalling programs), you're far safer in day to day use.
If you've never worked on a proper multi user operatings sytem (unix
and friends, or mainframe systems, etc), this may seem alien to you,
however. Rest assured though, windows is nearly the only OS that
seems to ship with a regular user defaulting to being a full computer
administrator.
Best Regards,
V
Virus Guy
Todd H. said:
You realize that the intent or design of user priv levels was so that
sys-admins in large corporations could control what individual users
could do with their machines. Then came other stuff, like remote
admin, which is on by default - even for XP home.
XP and XP-home do *not* have user priv levels to protect from
malware. Any such protection is incidental, and a not particularly
effective one given the malware in circulation today.
That's so that MS doesn't receive millions of support calls from home
users that want to install this or that. It reflects the philosophy
that stand-alone users that aren't part of a managed network should
use the admin-level account because anything less is just - silly.
Remember, XP and XP-home come configured for EASY DEPLOYMENT -
regardless of what environment it finds itself in. That's to keep
support issues to an absolute minimum.
There has been a huge price paid because of it.
T
Todd H.
Virus Guy said:
You sound like yer lookin for a fight, but I'm afraid to disappoint ya
-- you won't find me disagreeing with any of what you've added.
I think Apple walks this usability/security line far far better than
MS does. But alas, Windows is friggin everywhere so we deal with
it, and get good at diagnosing malware infections and reinstalling the
operating system.
Best Regards,
C
* * Chas
<snip>Poster 60 said:
Extreme bloatware. I ran NAV among others from 1995 until about a year
and a half ago. When I uninstalled NAV 2002 from the last system I was
running it on, I freed up 400MB of disk space! That's bloatware!!!
NAV installs a lot of files in the Windows folders. NOD32 is less than
30MB.
Chas.