Either Safer Networking Ltd. or Symantec leaving the Anti Spyware Coalition...

Should we follow ASCs definitions of Spyware/PUPS and add NIS to the detections?

  • Yes, detect NIS completely!

    Votes: 222 67.3%

  • Yes, but detect only some harmless files to wake up people.

    Votes: 26 7.9%

  • No, please waste our donations to go through legal channels, instead of using them to fight malware.

    Votes: 8 2.4%

  • None of the above.

    Votes: 74 22.4%
  • Total voters
    330
Status
Not open for further replies.
Norton (Symantec) needs a wake-up call!

They are getting WAY to arrogant for their own good.

:sick:

Not only do they want people to uninstall Spybot they are also going after Windows Defender (which I could care less about, really.)

I say don't waste the donations on fighting Symantec let Microsoft go after them?
 
what's the best option

My 15 - year old son has just bought himself a laptop which had a load of stuff preinstalled (with no disks) including XP and Norton 2006. He was also convinced by PC World that he needed to purchase NIS 2007.

I would also like to point out that he keeps getting ccApp.exe problems when trying to shut down for the night (which seems to take for ever and a day)

On the main PC I run Zone Alarm, AVG and Spybot - I do have Norton Utilities which a friend put on for me when I was having other probs.

Can someone please advise what the best option for my son's laptop is - I have not installed NIS 2007 yet and having read the comments here I'm not sure that I really want to!! If I try to uninstall 2006 and it goes pear-shaped I am going to be in big trouble as we have no disks for XP to reinstall and start again.

I did think about returning NIS 2007 back to shop but my son has taken sellophane wrapper off so they wouldn't accept that and reading some your comments here it doesn't look as though Symantec will accept return either without valid reason.

Any suggestions would be much appreciated.

BTW I love Spybot - have used this for a long time on my PC, haven't had any problems and it is so easy to use for some of us who don't really have the slightest idea about all this stuff.

Thanks in advance
 
Was this a new laptop that he bought. If it was, I thought it was illegal to sell a new computer without the program discs to go with it.
If he's stuck with it as is, try this. I got these instructions from Symantec some time ago and it worked for me. I have since stopped using NIS. This is also good for anti virus 2006 My other machine has System Works 2005 and I have no problem with it.

In order to resolve the issue disable Scan Removable Media and Floppy Disk:

1. Start Noton Internet Security 2007
2. Click on Noton Internet Security Tab
3. Select 'Settings tab'
4. Click on 'Virus and Spyware Protection Options' under 'Additional Options'
5. Select 'General Settings' under 'Real-Time Protection' in Left pane of the Virus and Spyware Protection Options Window
6. Uncheck 'Scan Floppy disk in drive A for boot viruses when Shutting down'
7. Click Ok

Lynn
 
cazzyk said:
My 15 - year old son has just bought himself a laptop which had a load of stuff preinstalled (with no disks) including XP and Norton 2006. He was also convinced by PC World that he needed to purchase NIS 2007.

I would also like to point out that he keeps getting ccApp.exe problems when trying to shut down for the night (which seems to take for ever and a day)

On the main PC I run Zone Alarm, AVG and Spybot - I do have Norton Utilities which a friend put on for me when I was having other probs.

Can someone please advise what the best option for my son's laptop is - I have not installed NIS 2007 yet and having read the comments here I'm not sure that I really want to!! If I try to uninstall 2006 and it goes pear-shaped I am going to be in big trouble as we have no disks for XP to reinstall and start again.

I did think about returning NIS 2007 back to shop but my son has taken sellophane wrapper off so they wouldn't accept that and reading some your comments here it doesn't look as though Symantec will accept return either without valid reason.

Any suggestions would be much appreciated.

BTW I love Spybot - have used this for a long time on my PC, haven't had any problems and it is so easy to use for some of us who don't really have the slightest idea about all this stuff.

Thanks in advance
Click to expand...

Hello,

I recently purchased NIS 2007 for a Canadian Retail Store (London Drugs) and was able to return it even though I had broken the seal on the package and on the sleeve. I told the clerk that I would NOT uninstall perfectly good security software to install an unproven product. I also told them that there was NO warning on the packaging that this would be required, if there had been I would NOT have purchased it.

This being said I did go to the Symantec Website first. Used the Contact Us Link and asked for phone support for NIS 2007. Gave the reason as I wanted to return the product. I received a Priority ID # and a toll free number. Phoned, explained situation honestly and was sent an email with instructions on returning the product for a refund check. Being from Canada shipping with tracking is to expensive which is why I went back to the retailer.

I hope this helps?
 
Thanks both of you (Lynn1102 and Oppressed) - I will give it a try and see what happens. Any suggestions what he should use instead?

As I said I use AVG, ZoneAlarm ans Spybot on the main PC - is this sufficient or should he be using something else as well or instead? He spends most of his time on the internet as well as using it for GCSE coursework (you can see why I don't want to beggar it up!!)

Thanks again
 
Suggestions

Thanks both of you (Lynn1102 and Oppressed) - I will give it a try and see what happens. Any suggestions what he should use instead?

As I said I use AVG, ZoneAlarm ans Spybot on the main PC - is this sufficient or should he be using something else as well or instead? He spends most of his time on the internet as well as using it for GCSE coursework (you can see why I don't want to beggar it up!!)

Thanks again
Click to expand...

Hi there,

Those three are excellent choices, but you won't quite have all bases covered. I've written a small article on the subject on my blog: http://spywarebob.blogspot.com/2006/04/beware-of-rogue-anti-spyware-programs.html

The nature of spyware and adware requires a multi-layered defense to counter it. As a minimum I would suggest adding Lavasoft Ad-Aware and maybe AVG Anti-Spyware Free
(formerly ewido).

Along with these, make sure the security settings are up to speed in Internet Explorer, or try Firefox or another browser. Finally, the weakest link in any computer security setup is the human operator, so knowledge of safe surfing habits is also strongly advised.

Best,

Rob
http://spywarebob.blogspot.com
 
I have read a lot of the post in these thread and I have also been a Norton/Symantec product user, but I have no longer run nor recomend the use of any Symantec Security Suite or product.
The last norton I have use was NAV 2000 in which I run with some problems to uninstall it from W98. It left my windows crashed as it didn't remove all the registry application start links.

Then I have use several AV as many people stated here: Kaspersky, Nod32, AVG Free, Avast, etc. From all of them I now use AVG Free on the lower resourses machines like Pentium200 or other old stuff runing W98, and Avast on other pc's that have a little more power; that is only because I like the Avast Interface a little more that AVG and I like the fact that the free version is also available in other lenguages. NOD32 has an exeptional detection module probably not found in any other product, but since it isn't free I cant no longer use it:sad: .

As for firewalls I have tryed many of them: Zone Alarm, Outpost , Keiro, Jetico, etc. From all of them I loved Outpost:bigthumb: (since it didn't popped out many windows i find it really user friendly) so I recomend it to anyone, I have also like Jetico but it really gets bothering when it ask for the same program even when you added it to the aplication trusted and marked to remember it:red: (has anyone have the same problem?); as for zone alarm free it is good, and it is easy to understand what it is assking so its the one I install when I have to shield computer for another person but I personaly use Outpost as I have more understanding that the avrage computer user has.

Finally to avoid spyware/other sh!t I use spyware search & detroy and I allways recomend it, It s grate to get rid of that scumbag software. But to avoid geting spyware installed on first place I can only recomend you to do not download any untrasted software (crack/warez/unknown p2p apps/etc); I do not accept to install ANY software that includes any type of browser toolbar as they generay are a security risk. I also use Firefox 1.5.0.8+No Script + Fasterfox+ adblock plugins + No cookie config and clean all at close settings.

All my passwords are never writen anyware, and of course never remembered by any program neither firefox nor any other; and that is the key to avoid loosing privacy. Bank info isn't stored in my computer neither, and just in case any sensitive content is Encrypted using TrueCrypt tool :bigthumb:
And finally I use a router, with properly configured firewall as the first incoming line of defence.

When in windows envoriment Security Upgrades are applaid as fast as windows promts me, (that is because I choose what to install and what not to); probably the windows tool to detect legal windows installs could be also consider a form of malware; because its generaly installed without user knowlage and perform info gathering of the Operative System and other information. Despite Being a Legal Windows user I really hates when M$ do things like that without my consent. That was the primary reason I swiched to linux :bigthumb: some time ago but I can't get rid of Win due to some specific software I use (ACAD, MultiTrack Sound editing tools, Video Editing Software), I know they all had their linux free competion that does the basic stuff but sometimes basic software isn't enough (QCAD vs ACAD is a good example)

As for the question Itself, I feel real shame of what symantec has done, and I encourage you to detect only some harmless files to wake up people and provide a link to these forum topic, so you let people decide what to do with their computers and sperad the voice.
But you should allways be very carfull on what you do, couse maybe you could get in a real legal trouble if you do any of the first 2 options so be shure you have some (at least minimal) legal advice to avoid geting a lawsue after you do what you are going to do. (I suspect that if for example you somehow point out that they are doing something that they aren't doing you could get sued for difamation or something like that) I wouldnt be the first time that a big company try to steal another people's good work with a legal movement. And Its very probable that if you do get to that point you may loose just because the donations we send could not keep up with a gigant corporation like symantec.

So that is what I think and I feel about the symantec problem. I am supporting and will continue supporting Spybot as long as I can, and have no doubts I will encourage other people to install Spybot; and if they have to choose betwen Symantec and Spybot I'll let know as many as I can the other alternative software so they can continue using spybot and get rid of NIS software. Sorry about the spelling mistakes (Spanish user here, with rusted english)
Long Live Freeware,
Long Live Spybot S&D
 
@SpySentinel

On most computers ( i say "most" because it's happened to mine, and many others that have posted here ), because it uses mega [SIZE=-1]resources that slow many computers down considerably when it's running and causes errors with ccApp.exe. Also, they want to be the only program you use and say that other programs cause "conflicts' if they are already installed when you install Norton's.

IMHO, such software causes more problems than it solves. I've had trojans and viruses totally disable Norton's to where it wouldn't even detect or get rid of them. Such software isn't worth my time and should be pulled off the shelf immediately ..IMHO. I'm sure you'll run into the same problems given time and you'll try to uninstall it ..and have the same problems most of the other users here have had, but if it really works for you, then I'm glad that you are the exception and I hope you enjoy the program for as long as it lasts. :bigthumb:
[/SIZE]
 
Last edited:
None of the Above.

Sorry, I didn't have time to read the previous replies, so my opinions may have already been expressed by others.

I strongly disagree with stooping to their level and detecting their products as some sort of malware.

Please note that under ASCs definition, technology that is implemented in ways that impairs user control over material changes that affecs their system security, in other words software that urges changes that reduce system security like NIS does, falls under the term Spyware (and Other Potentially Unwanted Technologies), so adding NIS to the detection would not be revenge, but a strict following of the ASC definitions of that malware description.
Click to expand...

That's splitting hairs, and you guys know it. Furthermore, it legitimizes their detection of your software by the same logic. You'll effectively be turning it into a duel with Symantec, and they have bigger guns.

But I think legal action may be a waste of money. (Then again, I always hate seeing lawyers make money.) I'd say go directly to some of the other members of the coalition and look for allies (which you've probably already been doing). Do your best to raise awareness while continuing to annoy the hell out of Symantec through legitimate channels until they cave.
 
Symantec a problem...??

I donated to Safer Networking this morning and went to this forum for the first time, being surprised about the controversy over Symantec. I have found their Norton Internet Security to be the best I have tested and read reviews about in recent years. I have never needed Norton Ghost although I considered installing it or another cloning program when my HDD went bad recently; however, I decided to bite the bullet and reinstall the OS and everything else so I would be rid of an accumulation of 'cyber-sludge' -- so I am not personally aware of any Symantec directives to first uninstall Spybot for this program.

Here is my experience with Norton Internet Security (NIS) 2007 that I recently installed when my subscription to NIS 2006 was expiring. Incidentally, I have never encountered any such 'incompatibility' issues with prior NIS installations (since 2002.) When I did encounter the warning about Spybot being incompatible with the installation of NIS 2007, and to first uninstall it, I was surprised. However, I quickly learned that this only concerned the 'installation' of NIS 2007 and that I could subsequently reinstall Spybot-S&D after NIS was installed, without causing problems for either program. I did this in short order without thoughts of any devious intentions by Symantec; I even thought to myself that Spybot must indeed be powerful for a large company like Symantec not being able to design an installation program to ignore the presence of Spybot -- also, why Spybot didn't have means for my disabling it temporarily.

So, in impromptu fashion, I voted 'None of the Above' in the poll, especially since the third option seemed to be misworded if not misleading -- with the words "DO NOT (waste)" being omitted from the option, "No, please waste our donations to go through legal channels, instead of using them to fight malware." How could such an omission or mis-wording be overlooked 'unintentionally' for an important poll when it changes the entire meaning of this option -- who would ever vote to waste donations...?

Now, having Scotch-Irish demeanor I have made plenty of phone-calls and written bunches of letters over the years concerning matters that I felt were important to be righted. And, if I had spent untold hours developing, managing and operating the Spybot program and web site (and caring so much about its quality and longevity) I would likely be taking action with Symantec myself.

However, having just now learned more about the Symantec company and its officers and policies from an internet search, I am wondering whether Symantec indeed has devious and possibly illegal intentions against Safer Networking's Spybot-S&D. Information in the following links may be pertinent to those feeling strongly enough about the subject issue to follow-up meaningfully:

Symantec's Corp. Officers:
http://www.symantec.com/about/profile/management/executives/index.jsp

Locations (found a surprise here):
http://www.symantec.com/about/profile/locations/index.jsp

Code of Conduct
(At least an indicator of their professionalism, much more than most companies):
http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/irol/89/89422/pdf/CodeOfConduct_13106.pdf

From my experiences in contacting folks at both large and small companies, I should think that Symantec's people would be more than willing to discuss the 'incompatibility' issue with PepiMK representatives and resolve matters amicably. Conversely, if a case can be made that Symantec is (even with an unproved 'likely') intentionally attempting to harm Spybot and its developers, THEN THE WHOLE WORLD NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT IT, not just those at this forum or who may happen to read Spybot's home page info.

I intend to write a letter of inquiry to Symantec's CEO today, how about you? The bit about the whole world needing to know about any wrongful intentions, if true, will be highlighted but in a non-accusatory manner at this time.

It will also be interesting to read about any follow-up at the Spybot home page, or this forum.

Best Wishes,
Mac
PS - Everyone should be so fortunate as to live only 300 steps from their office.
 
My advice: don't bother to blame Symantec, it stinks.

quoted from:
http://www.thepcspy.com/articles/other/what_really_slows_windows_down/5

bootdelay.png


primedelay.png


fileiodelay.png
 
Last edited:
loving anything BUT symantec products

Not too long ago, i was a newbie to the computer world, and i thought my new found computer was installed with all the best of everything....(of course it had Norton)..well, that just proved to be the most aweful thing i had ever dealt with in my life. Go figure,,, my comp crashed ...HARD! It was a nitemare. Eventually after a few years of dealing with norton and mcafee...i started listening to my instinct.
Fiends of mine who are IT pros..and one who is a professor at a collegeand a microsoft tech to boot, sugested i try spy bot along with the other programs i use( ad-aware and antivir)( i was using avg but had a few issues that caused a crash). well, i have told everyone i can imagine about spt bot.
Including my mom who is new to the comp world and has norton and just crashed...well she is safe and sound thanks to spy bot.

Symantec needs to get off the high horse and realize that if we all work together than OMG,, things go better for all.
I say detect the crap out of all their products and let them deal with it after that.
 
macbd1 said:
Symantec's Corp. Officers:
http://www.symantec.com/about/profile/management/executives/index.jsp

Locations (found a surprise here):
http://www.symantec.com/about/profile/locations/index.jsp

Code of Conduct
(At least an indicator of their professionalism, much more than most companies):
http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/irol/89/89422/pdf/CodeOfConduct_13106.pdf

....I intend to write a letter of inquiry to Symantec's CEO today, how about you? The bit about the whole world needing to know about any wrongful intentions, if true, will be highlighted but in a non-accusatory manner at this time.
Click to expand...

I wrote to Symantec's CEO last Friday and pursued the matter further with their Tech Spt in conjunction with a minor matter this morning, which may go on up the corporate ladder.

However, I also found the following info this morning, buried within Symantec's Knowledge Base data: (at link below)
http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/sharedtech.nsf/0/2f5f420bd905ac77882571e0005e8f21?OpenDocument

In essence, it says this about a Spybot-S&D warning window that may appear during installation of NIS 2007:

Warning: "Spybot - Search & Destroy has detected an important registry entry that has been changed."

"This message is displayed by the Tea Timer feature of Spybot - Search & Destroy. The filename that the message displays can vary. For example, the filename may be ccApp, osCheck, IS CfgWiz, or a string of numbers and letters.

This message appears because your Norton product is making changes to the Windows registry, which is being protected by Spybot – Search & Destroy. When you install Norton Internet Security 2007, it must make changes to the Windows registry. Because Spybot Tea Timer does not know if these changes are safe, by design, it displays a warning message.

When you see the message, you must tell Spybot to allow the changes. If you press Enter when you see the Spybot message, although Norton Internet Security 2007 will appear to install, the Phishing Protection feature will not function.

Symantec is working with Safer Networking, the makers of Spybot, to address this situation.

You can work around this situation by uninstalling both programs, and then reinstalling Norton Internet Security 2007 before reinstalling Spybot - Search & Destroy."
(End of Symantec's quoted info.)

Although this may explain *a problem,* it certainly does not explain why Symantec's NIS 2007 program-installer abruptly warns their customers that Spybot-S&D is *incompatible* with NIS 2007 and to un-install it before installing NIS 2007 -- saying nothing about cooperating with Safer Networking to help correct the matter and nothing about it being ok to reinstall Spybot-S&D after installing NIS 2007.

So...it appears to me that Symantec indeed has devious intentions to harm Spybot-S&D and its owners. Symantec's response will be posted here along with any further plans for follow-up.

Regards,
Mac
Click to expand...
 
Mac, The following is my opinion and is not to considered for or against program or company. I use both Spybot and Noron's anti virus and have no problems with either of them. I do think you're getting a little picky about some of your complaints.

First - I went to the Nortons site and it took me about 10 seconds to find the FAQ about Spybot. I don't consider this to be "buried". The warning you mention is not Norton's, it's Spybots.

Next - If you follow the instructions when installing Norton's and allow the change, it installs fine. If not you have to un-install and do it again. If you don't want to do it, go to the site and get the un-install tool.

Next - Several time this week, I got updates from Windows. Each time Spybot popped up several times and warned me about the changes. I allowed the change. The first time I installed Spybot, due the that window being half obliterated, I couldn't see it and it would not allow any windows updates. I had to un-install Spybot to get the updates.

Next - Several time during the past 2 weeks I installed or updated other programs on my system. Each time it was suggested to disable all virus and spyware programs. This is true for many programs you install or download to Windows. I can disable Nortons, but not Spybot. I had to un-install it to get my programs installed..

Next - In your second last paragraph you mention "incompatable" and not being able to re-install Spybot, yet in the paragraph before that, the Norons info says to install Nortons first, then RE-INSTALL Spybot.

I have never had Nortons crash my system or know anyone who did. There are many minor imcompatability between many programs. If you have a Windows system, you have to learn to live with them - even if you don't have windows system, you have other problems. That's part of computer life.

Lynn
 
The last copy of NIS I had was 2005 and after spending many hours managed to persuade it to allow my dial-up connection. Everything was fine for few months but things went south and fast I'm convinced it was an update for the Firewall that did it. My main problem was after using Outlook Express 6 it wouldn't let you shutdown the computer and would only allow shutdown if you De-activated NIS 2005 first. The other problem I had was after having to format my computer to get rid of the problem (Symantec Customer care was hopeless) I re-installed NIS 2005 and two new problems presented themselves. 1. ccapp.exe error messages on shutdown and 2. bizarrely it wouldn't let me schedule a virus scan and every time I went into Windows Program scheduler it would just bring up an error message saying the program cannot be scheduled.

Not long after I got rid of Norton My problems ceased and now I run Ad-Aware 1.06 Pro, Spybot 1.4, Avast 4.7.892 Free Edition and Zone Alarm 6.5.737.000 Free Edition, Firefox 2.0 with ULPS 1.2, Adblock Plus 0.7.2.2, Adblock Filterset.G Updater 0.3.0.4, McAfee Site Advisor 25.0, Google Toolbar 2.1 and Google Toolbar 4.0. I also have numerous Stand Alone tools Just In case.
 
Lynn1102 said:
Mac, The following is my opinion and is not to considered for or against program or company. I use both Spybot and Noron's anti virus and have no problems with either of them. I do think you're getting a little picky about some of your complaints....
Click to expand...

Lynn,

Thanks for addressing my concerns but you apparently did not read both of my postings above and have twisted a few of my words and phrases in your response. I also note from a couple of your other postings that you have had problems installing and using Spybot-S&D. I've not had problems with either Spybot-S&D or NIS 2007 (and prior versions) and have both programs installed on two computers (NIS 2006 on the 2nd machine.)

In trying to make my position more clear to you, and possibly others, I recently installed Norton Internet Security (NIS) 2007 on my primary machine and subsequently visited this forum for the first time on a whim. I was surprised to find this Spybot/Symantec controversy but quickly became interested when recalling what I considered to be misleading statements by Symantec during my installation of NIS 2007.

Trying to be brief, Symantec's installation CD only stated that Spybot-S&D is *incompatible* with NIS 2007 and to un-install it, it said nothing about what this incompatibility is, nothing about its ramifications, nothing about it being only temporary for the installation of NIS, and nothing about it being ok to re-install Spybot-S&D after the NIS installation. I learned that others had reinstalled Spybot-S&D without any difficulties, from another on-line source, after I initially found nothing in regard to Spybot-S&D being incompatible from a visit to Symantec's site. (I should think this unqualified 'incompatibility' would be highlighted to potential buyers of NIS 2007, in order for them to decide whether to buy NIS or not, rather than learn this after purchase..??)

To me, this omission by Symantec to their NIS 2007 customers, and their having only an unqualified statement that Spybot-S&D is incompatible and should be un-installed, smacks of devious intent to harm their competitors, the Kolla father-son team and other developers of Spybot-S&D in this case. As I pointed out clearly though, I previously held Symantec and its management in high regard and that I intended to learn more.

The more I learn leads me more toward believing that Symantec indeed has devious intentions toward Sypbot-S&D devlopers, and is attempting to lead their customers toward 'abandoning' Spybot-S&D. My latest update on this will be posted after I finish this one to you.

In my 2nd posting above, I was simply relating what I had found from a deeper search of the archives at the Symantec site, which is apparently the 'only' information they have published concerning 'any' type of conflict with Spybot -- and this is limited to their explanation of a 'Tea Timer' conflict, saying nothing about their unqualified claim that Spybot-S&D is 'incompatible' with their NIS 2007 program. Incidentally, the Kolla's say in their introduction to this string that Symantec has 'not' been cooperative about this matter, while Symantec claims they are working with Safer Networking to address the situation, so who is being truthful here, I wonder. I'd like to hear more about this from the Spybot team.

Lynn, I hope this helps.
Mac
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top