Norton 2005 Anti-spyware errors

If this posts twice, I apologize...my browser got psycho on me.

 

Thanks for Your Reply!

 

I wish I had the Full Prog, but Noo~ it was pre-installed...

 

Other ppl have suggested there are "better" progs to use anyway...

 

Still I was disappointed in Norton ~ I guess that's the price of trialware?

 

Maybe I will make the change, I will continue to search for a solution ~ for a few!

 

I got a bit paranoid thinking something found a way in while the scan was broke!?!

 

So I cleaned it all up*heh                        Thanks Again ~ Rock On !

 

    *mK*

 

 

Be sure to check the Symantec site for removal instructions and removal tools, when necessary.

GM

"Do they work?"

 

I can only speculate on the difficulties that may be encountered during removal. The tools may be helpful as a last resort, short of wiping the hard drive and starting over with a clean installation.

 

I'm not familiar with NIS, but I suspect the resource consumption of NAV and NPF are within the norm of anti-virus and firewall applications.

 

The Privacy Control feature is likely consume some additional resources, and I'm not familiar with it or any similar software, but the ability to identify personal information and prevent it from being sent in an e-mail, an instant message, or posted on a board may provide some parents or new users with peace of mind. The last thing a parent wants to find out is that a child has sent their name and address to a stranger, and the system overhead seems so trivial in comparison. I don't know exactly what the Privacy Control feature does, but I suspect it is there to protect the innocent and unwary.

 

The Parental Control feature may have some active purpose that would contribute to the consumption of system resources, in addition to passively blocking certain types of internet sites.

 

I use on-line e-mail services almost exclusively, so the ammount of spam coming into my system directly is limited. By never revealing my ISP e-mail address, the only e-mail I have received there is from my ISP or e-mail I have forwarded from an on-line account. So I have no need for a resident spam filter. I'm also stingy with my on-line e-mail address, which has it's own spam filter, so I haven't experienced any real problem with spam. Others may not have this option, and the spam filter included in NIS may be of benefit. Of course, there are many other spam filters available, and I don't know how the one included in NIS compares.

 

One primary component of any security plan is anti-spyware, and it is not adequately addressed in NIS. Additional tools are required. AdAware, Spybot S&D, Microsoft AntiSpyware, Spyware Blaster, etc., etc., etc.

A router on any broadband connection is a very good idea, in addition to a software firewall on every PC. The boards related to networking may be invaluable if this is the first time you have installed a router.

 

GM

Thank You All for trying to help me resolve this Nightmare !

 

   Ive scanned and scanned, I finally feel secure w/ my comp*lol

I was finally able to find someone to talk to at symantec ~ seriously easy to remove!

btw, my sys came w/o the AV cd! (?) i didnt approve!

 

I wonder > ppl sell the security progs say removal is hard b/c they want you to buy Full prog?

  

Anyway, it is gone, thankfully(!) and I found a Nifty lil prog (( F-Secure )) highly recommended at cnet (btw). VERY easy to use/setup/maintain...even for the "not-so-savvy" ~ yet plenty of options to tweak too ~~>for the "know it alls" >> heh

 

.: My 2 cents :. I love reading reviews =)  I dig zdnet, cnet, & consumer reports~ They Help!

firefox - adaware - spybot s&d - stopzilla

Just my thoughts tho *heh* I think we can never be 2 careful/paranoid(?) hah

 

Thanks Again To All ! !

 

I think the extra features in NIS put an additional load on the system that many users don't have, particularly those with only anti-virus and firewall security applications running full-time.

The CNET review is positive, mentions that AdAware anti-spyware is integrated with the F-Secure anti-virus component, but allows that the F-Secure anti-virus component scores lower than Norton's anti-virus, and then goes on to compare the F-Secure firewall with Norton Anti-Virus, rather than comparing it with Norton Personal Firewall, which is a component of the Norton Internet Security suite.

In their system impact tests, they also compared F-Secure against Norton Anti-Virus, rather than against Norton Internet Security. The review offers no comparison of the Parental Control features, so it is difficult to determine whether it uses passive blocking to prevent access to a pre-defined list of web sites, or whether it scans web content for objectional material, and there is no mention of a separate Privacy Control feature. I raise these objections against the review, not the product. I have read other good comments about F-Secure.

http://reviews.cnet.com/F_Secure_Internet_Security_2005/4505-3667_7-31200443-2.html?tag=top

The Norton Internet Security User's Guide is somewhat lacking in providing technical details also, but if you go through the configuration and turn off everything except the anti-virus and the firewall, I'm sure the impact on system resources would be comparable to others. Norton Internet Security provides additional security that many users may benefit from, but it does come at a cost, and many users will remain secure with just firewall and anti-virus applications running, with occasional system scans for viruses and spyware, and some passive blocking applications to prevent the PC from making a connection with certain sites known to distribute malware or host other objectional content. The primary advantage of NIS is the inclusion of the Privacy Control feature, if it is needed. That particular component is not widely available from other sources, nor sought, but again those with inexperienced or younger users may appreciate the protection. It is a relatively new category in automated security. To test it, make up a SSN and enter it as information to be kept private, and then try to post that SSN on these boards. I believe the Privacy Control feature should prevent it, and you must ask, how many programs can do that? Then you must ask, do I have any users on my system who might do something like that? Then you might configure the Privacy Control feature to be active whenever that user is logged on, but not when you are logged on, because you know better than to post personal information anywhere it doesn't belong, which is 99.9999999% of the internet. The exception might be a connection to secure server with an organization you trust.

The first rule it to trust no one. You will receive official-looking e-mail requesting that you update your personal information. You will receive a pop-up telling you that malware has been detected on your system and you will be offered a link to a site where you can purchase the cure. You will be offered free software that, as explained on page 47 of the fine print, will track your internet usage in order to provide an enhanced user experience. With a PC and the internet, one bad apple can go a long way. Good security software combined with good security habits may keep you from becoming a victim.

In some cases, it may be better to select individual components that fit your security plan. The core components are one firewall, one anti-virus, and multiple anti-spyware applications. Parental control and spam filtering components may be added as needed, and there are many good choices for all of these components, and many of the better ones are free.

Here's my list.

Firewall - Zone Alarm
Anti-Virus - Norton (NAV)
Anti-spyware - AdAware, Spybot S&D, Spyware Blaster.

It has been nearly three years since any malware has been detected on my system, but I have also set all active content in my browser to disable or prompt, except for the Trusted Zone, where I have entered only the address of Windows Update and this forum. The prompting may become tiresome, but indicates exactly how much active content is unnecessary, and allows active content to be permitted on a case-by-case basis, if the site offers some benefit, appears trustworthy, has verifiable references, and the risk seems reasonable. As noted in the following article, active content can assume some level of control, sometimes full control, if it is permitted. There may be very few clues in advance to indicate whether the active content will be helpful or malicious. It's just code, and it never discloses it's intentions. The SP2 update to XP has made dramatic security improvements, and the threat of malicious active content may be moderated in that case, but I have not read a technical review stating that active content is no longer a threat.

https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/ehowes/www/btw/browser-sec-intro.htm

What I meant to say is that the full set of features in NIS is probably overkill for a careful and experienced user, but it's good to start with the extra security and to keep it enabled on the user accounts of those who are inexperienced and/or young. An experienced user can work through the configuration and eliminate some features on their own account, when the functions of the components become clear and the presence of other security controls, either programs or user caution, makes them unnecessary. Once the suite is rolled back to a firewall and anti-virus combination and the censors are removed, the system should be a bit more responsive. There are also a number of system configuration adjustments that are commonly applied to make a system more efficient. The default configuration is never as secure, efficient, or reliable as it should be. Firewall and anti-virus applications are commonly included with a new system, but anti-spyware protection is always lacking, due in part to the fact that multiple solutions are required, and independant contributors have led this battle, making it hard for a commercial enterprise to form a business relationship to include the software. Plus, there remains an attitude in the business community that spyware/adware is distinct from viruses and threats from hackers, because it's business. To a user, the distinction may seem moot.

Well! Now I need more coffee!

 

 

GM

P.S. - Consumer Reports June 2005 has a review of 11 internet filtering software applications.

Ranking

 

1 SafeBrowse.com Safe Eyes (2005)
2 Microsoft Parental Controls (9.1)
3 SurfControl CyberPatrol (7.0)
4 Symantec Norton Internet Security (2005)
5 McAfee Privacy Service (2005 Version 7)
6 Solid Oak CyberSitter (9.4)
7 AOL Parental Controls (9.0)
8 Intego ContentBarrier X (10.1) (Mac)
9 Anonymizer Net Nanny (5.1)
10 SoftForYou iProtectYou Pro (7.1)
11 KidsNet KidsNet
Filtering is included in the AOL and MSN service plans.

 

 

GM