Symantec fixes Norton vulnerability

[rpm]

http://mybroadband.co.za/nephp/?m=show&id=1652

[alchamy]

Just another reason not to use anything from Norton.

[noswal]

What are the other reasons?

[alchamy]

Symantec products tend to be bloated, the virus protection is also useless.

Here are a few more reasons not to support symantec.

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2005/12/symantec_antivi.html
http://safer-networking.org/en/news/2006-01-07.html
http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid14_gci1153885,00.html

[alchamy]

Isn't it interesting how Norton Personal Firewall (http://www.symantec.com/home_homeoffice/products/internet_security/npf2006/sysreq.html), Norton AntiVirus (http://www.symantec.com/home_homeoffice/products/internet_security/nav2006/sysreq.html) and a bunch of other Symantec/Norton products (http://www.symantec.com/home_homeoffice/products/internet_security/index.html), do not list Linux as a system requirement...

Kinda makes you wonder if Symantec realised there was zero money to be made from [developing] Linux versions of their products...:)

Good point, AVG, Avast,Kaspersky and BitDefender all have linux versions while symantec and mcafee dont seem to.

[Peter7]

Symantec products tend to be bloated, the virus protection is also useless.

Here are a few more reasons not to support symantec.

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2005/12/symantec_antivi.html
http://safer-networking.org/en/news/2006-01-07.html
http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid14_gci1153885,00.html

From the links you sent it also appears the other AV solutions mentioned have similar problems (with regards to the vulnerability from SAV)


Other similar flaws this year were found in products from Trend Micro, F-Secure, McAfee and ClamAV.

Who do you go for in the end? It's probably like Windows with all it's flaws that are discovered because of the large user base it has, and more developers able to patch them.

[alchamy]

Who do you go for in the end? It's probably like Windows with all it's flaws that are discovered because of the large user base it has, and more developers able to patch them.

Agreed, Norton would have their flaws noticed because of the larger user base.

Here is an interesting test (http://www.overclockers.com/articles1260/) comparing some of the bigger AV systems.

I have always liked Avast (http://www.avast.com/), its lightweight and the signature updates are tiny. They also offer a free version for home (http://www.avast.com/eng/avast_4_home.html) use.

[EchoDown]

Kaspersky with Sygate.
Kaspersky has realtime protection all that stuff new definitions everyday,its real hardcore and will not bloat,Ive seen Hijack this logs with lines and lines of symantec entries,very yucky,

[Gambit]

I have always liked Avast (http://www.avast.com/), its lightweight and the signature updates are tiny. They also offer a free version for home (http://www.avast.com/eng/avast_4_home.html) use.

I made the switch from NAV (which I've been using for at least 6 years) to Avast about 6 months ago and I'm never going back. I switched because I found NAV making my pc really slow.

[ghoti]

anyone who uses Nortons, deservecs what they get

[BTTB]

Using Nod32 (http://www.nod32.co.za/) here.:)