Member Avatar for kc0arf

Once upon a time, Symantec was a known leader in the computer software industry. They had compilers (Think C/C++), purchased and maintained Peter Norton's DOS / Windows Tools, and developed some products for the Mac. Today, they are well known for their Corporate Antivirus tools, although their reporting and functionality leaves room for improvement. More recently, they have expanded into fighting spyware, and as discovered by Network Computing, the spyware component fails to measure up.

Feel free to go over to Network Computing's site, and read the article for yourself.

To the general public, anything that causes the computer to do something unexpected, aside from an obvious hardware failure (I saw smoke! Seriously!), can be blamed on a virus. The lines among the types of malware are blurred -- viruses are lumped in with worms, spyware, viruses, and macro viruses. Even here at DaniWeb, we do not differentiate among the animals -- we lump them into one forum for innoculation.

So, people expect a product like Norton Internet Security (NIS) to be a one-stop solution for protection on the very vunerable Windows platform. Companies like Symantec should know that the internet is an explosive environment, and that more and more people are attaching their computers to a high-speed network connection (DSL/Cable). I'd have to argue that a malfunctioning product like NIS 2006 is more of a problem than a solution -- people will believe they are protected, while in reality, they are not.

Perhaps it is time to look at McAfee, Panda, and/or Zone Labs for additional layers of security.

  • 5 Contributors
  • 4 Replies
  • 267 Views
  • 1 Week Discussion Span
  • Latest Post Latest Post by npasma

Dani AI

Generated

This thread surfaces two recurring, actionable themes: security suites that cause stability or performance damage, and stability problems caused by multiple real-time products fighting each other. As notes, a broken protector can be worse than none; and recount installation/uninstall damage and crippling boot delays; flags multi-product conflicts; points out lighter-weight/free alternatives. Those reports map to predictable technical failure modes and a clear recovery workflow.

Common technical culprits to check for are kernel-level drivers or network-filter components left behind after a bad install, services that hang at startup, and layered network providers (LSPs) that corrupt name resolution or the socket stack. The right diagnostic sequence reveals whether the suite altered the boot path, the networking stack, or both.

Practical, repeatable checklist:

  • Review System and Application logs in Event Viewer for service/driver errors.
  • Boot to Safe Mode and try a clean uninstall; if that fails, use the vendor removal tool made for that product.
  • From an elevated command prompt run these repairs:
netsh winsock reset
netsh int ip reset
sfc /scannow
  • Inspect startup items and services (msconfig / Services.msc) and use a process/handle viewer to find persistent binaries.
  • Check Network Connections properties for leftover filter drivers; remove them and reboot.

Preventive practices that address the thread’s concerns:

  • Take a full image or at least a system restore point before installing major security suites.
  • Test new suites in a virtual machine or non-critical system first.
  • Run only one real-time antivirus engine; use secondary on-demand scanners for periodic checks.
  • Keep OS and drivers updated and capture failing service/driver names to search vendor knowledge bases for targeted fixes.

These steps tie back to the real incidents described above and give a safe, practical path for diagnosing, recovering from, and avoiding suite-related breakage.

Recommended Answers

All 4 Replies

Member Avatar for jwenting

I lost my trust in Symantec (and especially their Norton line) back in 1995 and ever since have only been reinforced in my decision to avoid them whereever possible.

Programs that corrupt your OS during installation.
Programs that just don't work.
Worst detection ratio of all commercial AV products I tested (so bad in fact that a 1 hour old copy at one point failed to detect a virus that had been detected by a 3 week old copy of McAfee...).
Programs that corrupt your OS during deinstallation.
Programs that fail to uninstall.

the list goes on.

Member Avatar for goldeagle2005

I have to agree.I am a die hard fan of symantec products, but NIS2005 was a total piece of junk. I installed it on a fresh install of Win XP as it came with my mobo CD. Firstly, the installation was slow and buggy. After setup and a reboot, it took ages for the computer to startup, as NIS was loading 4 components for the A/V and 6 for the firewall. I tried disabling the firewall, but no joy. The machine was as slow as ever. I uninstalled NIS, but the damn thing had messed up the OS so bad, I formatted the hard drive. This time, I installed plain NAV 2005. The OS felt sluggish after this, but it wasn't as bad as before. I kept NAV and installed ZoneAlarm for the firewall.
Lately, I've felt my system getting sluggish. I uninstalled NAV and voila...slick system. This time I installed avast! a/v home edition. I must say it's fast. It has a virus database of around 40,250 compared to 70,000+ for NAV, but I haven't faced any problems yet. I guess I'll retain avast!.
Any of you guys used avast!, do let me know if there are any issues with it.

Member Avatar for Toulinwoek

Yes, goldeagle2005, I have used Avast for nearly 2 years now and have had no problems whatsoever, other than somewhat longer boot times. I stopped using not only Symantec products, but also McAfee and the other pay-us-every-year bloatware products, and I very strongly recommend everyone do the same. It just makes no sense at all to pay for something when you can get it FREE, especially if you're paying for a bloated, bug-ridden false sense of security.
Do the reasearch, employ some sensible surfing habits and save yourself some time, money and headaches.
Use Avast or AVG for antivirus; both are certified by the same labs that certify the others...
Use a combination of the 3 major free spyware blocker/removers (Spybot S&D, AdAware, Microsoft Antispyware); none of them is perfect, but the many reviews you will find on them never mention how effective they are as a group, although most "experts" recommend having two or three...
Use Zone Alarm FREE for firewall. In this category, I like one called Outpost, because not only is it a very effective firewall, it also has the most unintrusive and effective ad blocker that I know of. It's not free, but for me the cost is worth it.

Member Avatar for npasma

Just a quick note, you mentioned- "Perhaps it is time to look at McAfee, Panda, and/or Zone Labs for additional layers of security."

Granted, maybe Symantec is flawed, but oftentimes the "American" solution is that if one antivirus program is good, 5 must be better. This leads to a lot of conflicts between software- in fact, often the programs are so busy fighting with each other than common viruses go untreated.

Better to find one solid antivirus program, and a good compatible anti-spyware program than to have a half dozen programs conflicting with each other.

As for spyware, you still can't be the free cost and effectiveness of "Spybot Search and Destroy" at:

www.safer-networking.org

Keep fighting the good fight, y'all!

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.