Author | Topic |
I supported Toymods
Location: Perth
Registered: July 2004
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Wed, 21 September 2005 02:01
|
|
Blown86 wrote on Wed, 21 September 2005 07:23 | Norton and Macafee are both shite!!
Been nuked using both including getting my bank account hacked and losing money using full Norton corporate updated 1 hour before.
AVG is miles ahead.
|
i would like to know how you summarised that obviously uneducated comment.
let me elaborate slightly.
Nuked is another term referring to Denial of Service, usually pertaining to external attacks on a specified box. Whether this be attacking known exploits in applications or the operating system. Denial of Service has nothing to do with the Antivirus, and usually its the job of an external Firewall to detract unwanted Port connections that might be trying to exploit a systems weakness (i.e. Sasser Worm). Part of the modern world of viruses and exploits is that theyre a blended threat, so once they infect one box, their role is to attempt to penetrate other systems for that same weakness. Antivirus is only going to go so far in these instances, you should get yourself a decent firewall to stop unwanted port connections/denial of service etc.
Of course thats not going to matter at all if someone with a dozen 100 meg Telia.se pipes is packeting your ass, then you can just turn off your PC and complain to your ISP.
Regarding Bank Account being Hacked, You were obviously the victim of a Phishing Scam. Phishing has nothing to do with Antivirus even though some vendors are looking to implement ways to block access to known phishing host servers. What you would have gotten is an email posing as your bank telling you to log on and check your bank details. The site may be dressed up as the real thing and appear to be the real thing, but its masqueraded on some compromised box somewhere in the world. Most of the time in russia or east asia (korea). If you put the details in, its hardly hacking or virus related.
If under the circumstance though, you did NOT fall for a phishing scam, and you actually did have a keylogger or Trojan running on your box (and it would have to be a bloody good one to get those sort of details), then your Symantec AV Corp Ed should have picked it up as most keyloggers and trojans are built on very similar engines. If it was the case, then you have every right to sue Symantec for damages pertaining to the fact that their 'propietary software' did not live up to its stated purpose. But you could only do that if you were actually running a licensed version of the software of course, which i doubt you were. Symantec AV Corp Ed requires a minimum purchase of 10 Licences which i seriously doubt you have gone and bought at a cost of $450+. Symantec aren't stupid. They lock down updates for certain Serial numbers you know..
Heres the scenario I'm seeing -
You have gone onto BitTorrent and downloaded a dodgy copy of SAVCE from some dodgy torrent site, and tried to run the keygen (trojan or worm masquerading as keygen) or crack (same thing) and its all gone peachy as far as you can see.
However in the background what youre not noticing is that that worm has contacted another site and downloaded a copy of the trojan to your machine and installed it (before liveupdate has even picked it up) and is running for any script kiddie to jump on into your pc..
Quite frankly if you use dodgy software then youre going to get Burnt and shouldnt be whinging when shit happens to you.
You also misunderstand the different purposes of different security products. Just assuming that AVG is doing the job because it has a pretty little screen and tells you what its doing is stupid. Its what AVG is NOT doing that you should be worried about.
Antivirus, Firewalls, Intrusion Prevention, Vulnerability Assessment, Outbreak Management, Anti-Spyware, Spam Management, the list goes on and theyre ALL different. Know your products before you go on about how shite they are.
|
|
|
| Subject | Poster | Date |
|
Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Nark | Tue, 20 September 2005 08:54 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
tooch | Tue, 20 September 2005 09:01 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
oldcorollas | Tue, 20 September 2005 11:10 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Lench | Tue, 20 September 2005 11:23 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
thu187 | Tue, 20 September 2005 17:35 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Hi-Ace | Tue, 20 September 2005 21:32 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Blown86 | Tue, 20 September 2005 23:23 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
hamgatan | Wed, 21 September 2005 02:01 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Blown86 | Wed, 21 September 2005 10:26 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
hamgatan | Wed, 21 September 2005 16:55 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Nark | Wed, 21 September 2005 23:22 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
hamgatan | Thu, 22 September 2005 00:31 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
havabeer | Wed, 21 September 2005 05:18 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Nark | Wed, 21 September 2005 05:29 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
river | Wed, 21 September 2005 06:11 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
hamgatan | Wed, 21 September 2005 06:34 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Blown86 | Wed, 21 September 2005 17:56 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Blown86 | Thu, 22 September 2005 00:46 |
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
MR. 2 | Thu, 22 September 2005 02:22 |
Current Time:
Fri Jan 31 05:23:23 UTC 2025 |
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.0064740180969238 seconds |