What Antivirus Sucks to the MAX!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well, I don’t want to buck the voting trend, and I have a distaste for Symantec, so I added my “go away” vote. However, I’d really like to vote for more than one…

LM

how Norton with hooter girls? hahaha

You know, it’s such as shame that Symantec has ■■■■■■■ Mr Norton’s name so badly…

That would be cool. How about adding some really hot swimsuit models & beauty queens. That would
great (:CLP)

Hey, I got an idea, How about I edit a picture of norton internet security with some swimsuit models instead holding it. :■■■■

Norton all the way… usually when some-one asks for my help concerning a computer problem… uninstalling norton, resolves it :stuck_out_tongue:

i like that way you think. ;D

Advertizing is Advertizing.

You won’t have any chance with me, mate. You should already know that.

:■■■■

Haha very true.Whenever someone calls me with a computer that’s grinding to a halt,my first question is,are you running Norton or AOL? (:LGH)

id say norton… although clan is bad (because if a zip file has more then 100 or some odd files it will flag it as a ‘packer trojan.’ since its free i wont say its the worst because it is infact great for an open source antivirus

I will not vote, because I want to see tests of efficiency and malware signatures first.

For a long time, Norton has had a very bad reputation among those who know a little more than nothing (in other words, more or less every member of this forum, and many other people). But is it really that bad, still? I’ve heard that they’ve been working on their AV’s system resources usage, e.g. Norton AV 2008 (or whatever it is called) should be much more efficient than older versions.

/LA

They all suck …
What idiot designed a OS that requires you to run 127 “security”-programs
or get hijacked within 15 minutes of going online ?

I kinda like the concept behind Clam-AV :
it was originally made for Linux-users to run as a service for windoze-users… ;D

I agree. But what sucks the most. Our friendly neighborhood antivirus “Norton” (:CLP)

After viewing the results, this thread should be renamed ‘Bash Norton Antivirus’. ???
Maybe you guys are referring to the yesteryear versions of norton? I have norton v2008 installed on my pc and really can’t find fault in it. www.av-comparatives.org testing shows norton av as one of the top av’s in detection and really isn’t that what it’s all about?

actually that is very biased. because windows is the most used operating system it is the most targeted. if macs were as popular as windows and had all of the functionality of windows then macs would be the hell hole of OS security.

That’s a fair point you make.Since Windows is on the vast majority of home computers it stands to reason that the malware writers will target it far more frequently.Maybe Mac and unix based systems are inherently more secure,maybe not.Until there’s a level playing field no-one can tell.

Totally agree, the reason there is a few mallware on mac is there are only few mac users worldwide. Mallware makers do not bother making mallware for mac by the way. (:SAD)

According to another independent test, Norton does not fare well against unknown threats. Because it only uses only one detection method, a) signature detection (detecting already known malware by the signature method)

Norton never has the following detection methods.

b) heuristic detection (detecting yet unknown malware by the method of emulation / code analysis / etc. Examples: “Heur.Trojan.Generic”; “a variant of: XXXXX”)

c) detection of suspicious file (detecting yet unknown malware by the method of informing the user about suspicious characteristics of a sample under analysis. Examples: “Suspicious file”; “VIPRE: Suspicious”)

d) detection of suspicious cryptor / packer (detecting yet unknown malware by the method of informing the user about the unknown / rare / suspicious packer / cryptor or about the fact of multiple packing / crypting. Example: “HEUR/Crypted”).
Nod32 uses detection a&b
Kaspersky uses detection a& b
Avira uses detection a & b & d
Esafe uses detection a & c

Common Sense 3 or 2 >1 detection methods clearly shows it cannot compete against it competitors.
Maybe AV Comparatives didnt test Norton against the unknown threats??
“See all these results” (:WIN)
http://virusinfo.info/index.php?page=testseng
http://www.virus.gr/portal/en/node/28

No offense, my friend but in a democracy, majority wins. It just like someone telling the world is flat, while all of us is saying it is round, So your opinion overuled.

The results on those sites are indeed interesting, my friend.

While I totally do agree with the fine results presented for Avira (which all of them seem to have copied from better sites…) - well, you know my opinion on Avira, I guess, and this ain’t a new opinion -

I am not too sure about that strange proggie only named in russian letters on site 1, though
(obviously cheap form of advertizing?) lol

Site No.2, virusinfo.gr, are obviously not up to date, with telling you a squared free only has 50 percent detection rate. (even if it is an antitrojan in the first place, which means the test is ■■■■.) because they used version 2. !!! It should be at least one of the 3.XX versions…
OMG this version is about half a year old, if not older? how can this be? Not just unfair, but really really poor testing behaviour… It really seems Zeus has left some of his folks. :slight_smile:

Site No.3 is right with Avira, but does not make clear if it’s the plus or the free version. Also poor.
I guess they all use stolen info from more reliable sites (remember the dubious site you promoted not too long ago?) and then do with this info what they like to:

a) be true
b) be almost true, but advertize their own stty product as being even better than the real best ones
c) use some true and some false results, and then tell you s
t about their malware which they do declare the best (buy it and get f…, you know? including christmas greetings from Russia, or, if less lucky, even China…)

All i can see is they all don’t even dare to touch Avira.

Cheers
The REBOL

no heuristics? really? what about bloodhound heuristics?

I didn’t know an opinion could be overruled. 88)

[attachment deleted by admin]

You’ve a lot to learn about democracy forum style (:LGH)