Internet security - ditch Norton?

geni said:
Zee drive by pdf attacks are still a problem.
Click to expand...
I actually can't think of the last time I opened a PDF on my home machine. But yes, it's obviously worth keeping Adobe software up to date, as with everything else.
 
Rat said:
I actually can't think of the last time I opened a PDF on my home machine. But yes, it's obviously worth keeping Adobe software up to date, as with everything else.
Click to expand...

Given Adobe's poor record of patching issues that's somewhat questionable.
 
Indeed, which is why I don't allow Flash to run by default.

Edit: Plus this.
 
Last edited:
Rat said:
I went for the more sensible option of ditching Norton in favour of just not clicking on executables from untrusted sources. Not a single virus since.
Click to expand...


Just the other day I accidentally clicked on a semi-concealed link in a spam blog post. It just went to a dodgy Chinese soft porn site, but it could have been anything.

If I decide to ditch Norton, do I uninstall it before installing something else? Does that not leave my machine vulnerable in the interim? How long does such a changeover take?

Given that I haven't really had any issues with it, would it be better just to give them the £45 and save myself the hassle?

Rolfe.
 
Rolfe said:
If I decide to ditch Norton, do I uninstall it before installing something else? Does that not leave my machine vulnerable in the interim? How long does such a changeover take?
Click to expand...
Yes. As long as you still have Windows Firewall (or another firewall program) running and you don't have your browser running, you shouldn't have any interim virus trouble in the time it takes to uninstall and reinstall.
 
I had a problem with Norton last month when my computer office program was accidentaly deleted, I lost all access to all of my files, and my auto-recovery wouldn't open.

Norton support told me that it was caused by a virus and that it would cost me $99. to fix the problem or $149. to fix it and come back again to fix it.

I pointed out that I had already paid for virus protection when I purchased Norton.
They told me I was still being protected from viruses but not the one that caused the problem so I still had to pay the $99.

Long story short I re-installed the office program and have access to my files again,
and I added a little more memory for my auto-recovery, problems solved.
There was never any virus, Norton was just trying to rip me off for $99.
 
Last edited:
Rat, I hope you also have image display turned off in any browser you use, because there are a number of attacks that use badly-formed images to cause buffer overflow code injection of vectors. Seriously, if you have no protection, there are many exploits that will get you even if you never click on an executable or an unknown link.
 
Well, I have MSE on this machine, and it shows nothing detected in its history. I have up-to-date backups of everything important, so if I ever get any nontrivial infection on here I could just reload everything. But you did say that these infections will get me, so I'm interested to know when this is going to happen. It's been several years since I've had on-access AV, and absolutely nothing has happened.
 
It's nice to hear that Norton is improving.

Nah, I still loathe Norton. It has cost me lots of time and energy to uninstall their previous crap. I wish they go broke. And then I'll be laughing and dancing on their grave. Too late for Norton.
 
geni said:
Given Adobe's poor record of patching issues that's somewhat questionable.
Click to expand...

They have moved to a quarterly patch schedule apparently. Patches for various versions of Reader & Acrobat are due next Tuesday.
 
Rat said:
Well, I have MSE on this machine, and it shows nothing detected in its history. I have up-to-date backups of everything important, so if I ever get any nontrivial infection on here I could just reload everything. But you did say that these infections will get me, so I'm interested to know when this is going to happen. It's been several years since I've had on-access AV, and absolutely nothing has happened.
Click to expand...

Depends which sites you visit. The last one I know of with any profile was some of the ads on encyclopedia dramitica.
 
Dancing David said:
Just FYI, in my limited experience the free version of AVG really really really slows down your machine.

Avast does not.

Again limited experience.
Click to expand...

This was exactly the same with me. I had AVG for years and recommended it to all friends but it became well slow and I moved to Avast which has ben far better.
 
My experience of viruses is mainly on work machines where the principal vector is USB drives loaded with pirated videos being copied . Nultiuser machines are vulnerable to the weakest link. I've given up trying to keep them clean. It won't stop till someone gets fired.
 
Soapy Sam said:
My experience of viruses is mainly on work machines where the principal vector is USB drives loaded with pirated videos being copied . Nultiuser machines are vulnerable to the weakest link. I've given up trying to keep them clean. It won't stop till someone gets fired.
Click to expand...

In our corporation we had huge problems with USB drives and autoplay spreading crap about the network. The images now have autoplay disabled.
 
Nothing much to add about the OP, but I will say that in my experience ClamWin has performed really poorly compared to other products (but well enough given what it actually is) in terms of detection and speed of use. It's slow as a slow dog.

Apart from that, I do wonder at people who say that Norton is worth using because it's not quite as awful as it used to be; that's a funny kind of logic. I wouldn't go buy a Yugo because people said it was a lot better than it used to be, I'd go buy a car magazine and start researching the best fit for my life. I'd get the Yugo if it fit, not because it was now up to par with the competition.

Why on earth does anyone pay for AV when there is free stuff that does the same thing? I really bump my brain against this one. If you need to drive to work and you have the choice of a free Yugo or an expensive Lada, why would you pick the Lada? Even if it was an expensive Porche, you'd still be a weirdo.
 
moopet said:
Apart from that, I do wonder at people who say that Norton is worth using because it's not quite as awful as it used to be; that's a funny kind of logic. I wouldn't go buy a Yugo because people said it was a lot better than it used to be, I'd go buy a car magazine and start researching the best fit for my life. I'd get the Yugo if it fit, not because it was now up to par with the competition.
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody said that it was worth getting because it isn't as awful as it used to be. I believe the jest of it was that although previous versions may have sucked the newer ones are very good. And in fact, according to most reviews I have read, it is the best security suite out there.

Why on earth does anyone pay for AV when there is free stuff that does the same thing? I really bump my brain against this one. If you need to drive to work and you have the choice of a free Yugo or an expensive Lada, why would you pick the Lada? Even if it was an expensive Porche, you'd still be a weirdo.
Click to expand...

I agree that these security suites generally are not worth buying but they do include some features that free av software usually does not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom