For users of Symantec products

[SuperSparks]

Most products are affected:

Symantec products hit by high-risk flaw (http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,39020375,39243160,00.htm)

[LindaHewitt]

Symantec has a long history of buggy software. This is true to such an extent that I do not allow any Symantec products on any of my computers. There are excellent alternatives to choose from, where the vendors understand about tech support and writing quality software.

Linda

[lgbpop]

For months I've noticed that most of the logs posted in the HJT forum show Norton as the AV protection. Maybe this is one reason why?

I agree with Linda. I removed Symantec/NAV on my own new installs (3 this year) and recommend to my customers that they use another AV program. The big problem is that Norton's name to AV is like AOL's is to browsers, and it's usually bundled ("free")....novices aren't aware of alternatives; they need to be made aware of the choices open to them.

[LindaHewitt]

Addendum:

Both of the big name AV software vendors (Norton and McAfee) are in the same category. These companies have been skating on their past reputation for years. I recommend to my clients and friends that they use almost any AV other than these two.

Symantec has never been a supporter of user groups and now suddenly they are sending out their AV products for product review in UG newsletter. IMO, they are trying to take a short cut to improving their sales, instead of doing what really needs to be done.

Linda

[Welshjim]

I have Norton AV 2005 which is on Secunia's list. However, I got it as part of Norton SystemWorks 2005 Premier, which is not on the list.
I also do not have the file Dec2Rar.dll on my PC. Did I have that file in early December and Norton has since replaced it? I do not know, but I do not have it now.
So I wonder how Secunia's notice affects my PC.

[HAN]

While I must admit that I am in the don't care for Norton club, I also think it's just a doggone shame that Norton cannot get it's act together and make things better. Do you suppose it's got something to do with being number 1 in sales and coasting on their laurels? It just seems they have one issue after another...

[LindaHewitt]

IMO, Symantec has always been run by the bean counters, whose philosophy has always been maximize profit by cutting development and techsupport costs.

They bought Norton Utilities, which had an excellent reputation and a solid customer base. Likewise, they have purchased PowerQuest, Veritas and a number of other excellent companies. But Symantec makes these purchases typically for a key piece of technology and typically they have no intention of providing the same level of development or support to the product line of the company that they have just purchased.

So, is it any wonder that so many people have adopted the philosophy that if the brand name is Symantec, run as fast as you can in the opposite direction, unless you want to endure a lot of grief.

There are many companies that produce a quality product and earn a good profit but the profit is not as huge as companies like Symantec expect.

MCI produced excellent services and had an excellent reputation but when bean counter Bernie Ebbers, CEO for WorldCom purchased MCI, everything went to hell in a handbasket. Now, I will not touch anything with the MCI brand name. It will take a very long time for them to restore their credibility and reputation.

Symantec never had a good reputation on it own. It has survived based on purchasing products with an excellent reputation and with a solid customer base for those products.

Linda

[Herring]

Linda - You mean things like my current firewall/popup stopper.. AtGuard which was bought a few years ago by Symantec and became their firewall (though I think they took the ad display/pop-up stopper out of it). And around that time they also bought Ghost and bloated it too.
No love for their products here.