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

[mrsarkar]

I've hated Norton for the last couple of years since they total my computer with NIS 2005. I don't think much to Microsoft either because of all the dogey updates that have caused all kinds of trouble for me over the years. Although I thoughly dislike Norton, Adding ANY NIS products to the definitions list would be corporate suicide since Synmantec would sue you to death and your good name would be dragged through the dirt. I personally belive the best way to go about this unfortunate mess is to just keep delveloping Spybot and getting it as good as you can and eventually people will decide to ditch NIS and its system destroying "Issues" (e.g. wreaking Outlook Express 6 and causing it to crash Windows when you try to shutdown the computer) for the better product that is Spybot.

I agree.

[nweissma]

From March 2005 to December 2005, Symantec labeled Spybot-S&D as incompatible to Norton Ghost, and endangering backups, with no reason given to us in 19 months now. Since October 2005, Norton Internet Security has told users that Spybot-S&D would be incompatible and they had to remove Spybot-S&D.
Eleven months later, Symantec has given us just one explanation that was mostly invented and not fitting. Even though Symantec again promised changes, they have now released Norton Internet Security 2007 which again urges the user to uninstall Spybot-S&D.

We would have loved to work with them to remove any incompatibility, but although they were eager to tell their customers about these so-called 'incompatibilities', even threats of legal action could not persuade Symantec to give us any details. Well, actually they promised they would send us details, but those promises haven't been fullfilled for nearly a year. Is Symantecs Quality Assurance department so bad that they can't either find the old reports or re-test?

Both of us are members of the ASC, the Anti Spyware Coalition, a group of anti-spyware companies working together - in theory. The ASC has discussed Best Practices for half a year now. Sadly, this seems to only affect practices against malware creators, while coalition members are allowed to fight each other as much as they want.

If we created spyware instead of anti-spyware, we probably would laugh various body parts at seeing how one anti-spyware application removes the other.

Arbitration by the ASC has only resulted in broken promises by Symantec.

We will therefore bring a motion in front of the ASC to expel Symantec for damaging the ASC through its practices of illegal improper competition and libel, resulting even in malware creators being able to spread their malware better. Should this motion be rejected by a majority of ASC members, we most likely leave this coalition as it would then appear that ASC is favoring libel as a proper way of competition.

If you think that anti-spyware companies should fight spyware creators instead of each other, please send an email to ASC members of your choice, found here, and/or to the ASC itself, at asc@cdt.org.


Following that, thinking on how we could stop Symantec, we have two options: taking expensive legal steps, or behaving the same way as Symantec, accepting the removal of a competitor as a "legit" step.
Should we add detection for Norton Internet Security 2006 and 2007 as Malware or Possibly UnPopular Software (PUPS)?

* Yes, detect NIS completely!
* Yes, but detect only some harmless files to wake up people.
* No, please waste our donations to go through legal channels, instead of using them to fight malware.
* None of the above.

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.

Please feel free to vote in this topic, and/or leave your comments, especially if you vote for option 4 (None of the above).

i think you're going overboard on this. Symantec does not act nobly because it is receiving terrible reviews in the forums: all of the gurus advocate against its use, for many reasons (my oem's configuration came with a 12 month subscription to norton 2007 antivirus - and i still ripped it out and replaced it because it is not vista compatible and was wreaking havoc with onecare and vista security center), while spybot is receiving rave reviews - my oem, eg, accolades you.

btw, install a spell check because i'm a terrible typist. and what do you coinsider a reasonable donation - keeping in kind that the powers-that-be keep me in poverty. when are you getting married to the most wonderful girl on earth?

[gunners4eva]

I've hated Norton for the last couple of years since they total my computer with NIS 2005. I don't think much to Microsoft either because of all the dogey updates that have caused all kinds of trouble for me over the years. Although I thoughly dislike Norton, Adding ANY NIS products to the definitions list would be corporate suicide since Synmantec would sue you to death and your good name would be dragged through the dirt. I personally belive the best way to go about this unfortunate mess is to just keep delveloping Spybot and getting it as good as you can and eventually people will decide to ditch NIS and its system destroying "Issues" (e.g. wreaking Outlook Express 6 and causing it to crash Windows when you try to shutdown the computer) for the better product that is Spybot.

I also agree with Terminator. Too much legal repercussions for detecting. However we could use the forum to "advise" members to try programs that don't kill their computer(s), such as zonealarm or avg's stuff. After all, by flagging safernetworking in their program Symantec are advising their users to delete spybot s&d. Tit for Tat.

[Frank C]

Reported here:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/4938c170-058...b5df10621.html

[winelf]

Symantec is soooooo bad that their only hope is to drive everyone else out of the market.
Speaking of folk that just hire lawyers instead of write good code - I joined this form today because I am so upset with what I read about oska not wanting their product detected even if it was installed without the permission of the owner of the computer.
I put together a little letter to send to their support people
==========
RE: Trojans and or spyware installing your product.
Please be aware that unwanted software, especially on systems used by children, is a real problem. There are many ways to keep ones system clean and proper for children ages 6 to 14. Some of these are spyware detection and removal programs.
It would be to your companies advantage to co-operate with the vendors of such software instead of threatening them. There are very strict laws in the US and I believe England and Germany about children and off color material or material parents have not approved of being placed on children's computers. If it can be proven that your company has hampered detection of unauthorized installs of its software, it very well could leave your company open to the legal liability of this material being on the child's system without parental consent. I believe there are prison sentences in England and Germany for these things while in the US people just sue for millions of dollars.
===========
Perhaps others of you could email them something also
supportAToska.com
gayle

[nOInfectIOn]

--> http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=2897 <--

"Published: 2007-05-31,
Last Updated: 2007-05-31 19:09:25 UTC"

"We have received a couple of reports that Symantec Antivirus triggers on the file 'blindman.exe', part of the SpyBot Search & Destroy package. Apparently only the file included with version 1.3 was detected as a trojan, not the one included with the more recent version 1.4

Symantec has confirmed this issue occurred in the 05/30/2007 rev.020 Intelligence Update and LiveUpdate definitions. They've made available Rapid Release definition build 69173 (extended version 05/30/2007 rev. 035) to resolve the issue. LiveUpdate definitions that correct the issue were also published, version 90530ao (Sequence number: 69179; extended version 05/30/2007 rev.041)."

What a feeling... :D

[Peter Pan]

Hi,

sorry for my English, I'm a French guy but I'll do my best

Well, we are on a SB forum discussing about Symantec legitimacy and efficiency of its products. Perhaps Symantec forum do the same :/

I'm using Spybot S&D and Norton AV on my main PC and NIS on other computers and I never got all these problems people report. Perhaps I'm lucky. I also encoutered reliable and really skilled consultants who consider Symantec products are valuable for customers.

I recommend to my friend both of Spybot and Symantec products and I'll never encountered any problem after installation. I admit that Symantec products installation can be tricky and/or touchy but I always succeeded in installations working fine in the long term.

I also recommend users of Spybot products I install to donate and they do as they are happy with their fine working installation.

Well, I hope Symantec will become wise and responsible to solve its incompatibility with Spybot S&D by improving its product rather than libelling Spybot.

I vote for doing anything else than quarelling with each other. But I have some doublt about this when I consider that this argument is open since a so long time (september 2006)

Best regards to all, whatever you think about Symantec products!

[Lynn1102]

I also run spybot and nortons on my system and have no problems with either. If you follow the instruction with both programs for installing, you have a good working machine.
On the above post, Norons did find and correct the problem in a timely manner. I have had occassion where both ad-aware and spybot found files during the scan that were not spyware. It took me at least 30 seconds to fix the problem, but some of you take 30 minutes to complain about it and write messages.
Any two similar programs of any type will sooner or later run into conflicts - there are just too many possibilities. How many of you have NEVER had your system freeze, lock up completely, or crash. If someone can prove to me that this is being done on purpose, I'll be first in line to clobber somone.
I'm not knocking anyone - I'm happy with all of them.

Lynn

[jefelex]

I have to admit that I baled on NIS years ago in favor of Spybot, Spybot is such a good product, along with the other goodies like the file analyser and that. I baled on Microsoft not long ago - I switched to UBUNTU - very stable and very good. I hope that Spybot can craft some tools to work with linux, although I don't feel, (although I'm not absolutely sure) that I don't have much spyware on this computer at all (that is why I need a linux spybot to test!!) :-) I should try it with WINE - I'll post back here with results!!

If there are any spybot developers reading this, a linux version would be a good thing - it will take over Microsoft - resistance is futile, Microsoft will be assimilated! :-)

John

[jefelex]

It works with WINE, but will only check the redundant files on my leftover windows NTFS-3G partition that I have yet to delete. but of course when I do that, SpybotSD will go with it (athough I still have it on numorous backups and that) I wonder if I copy it to /usr/bin/spybot it will work there??!!