| Author | Topic |
|---|
Location:
Cabramatta, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Tue, 20 September 2005 08:54
|
 |
Trying to decide which one to get for the Windoze box.
I've used both but didn't really pay much attention to them. Norton seemed to slow the computer down quite a bit but I think it was running some filter over the LAN connection.
Thoughts? Experiences?
|
|
|
Location:
Bulleen, Melbourne
Registered:
June 2002
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Tue, 20 September 2005 09:01
|
|
|
Norton Internet Security is a pile of shit, and it does slow computers down. We often remove it due to it causing problems at the computer place I work at. Norton Antivirus is ok on its own though. McAfee isn't too bad, although if you are after a virus scanner only, not a whole 'Security Suite', then AVG (www.grisoft.com) is very good, and is available as a free version with free updates, or you can buy a license and get some extra stuff.
|
|
|
Location:
Kita-Ku, Sapporo, Japan
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Tue, 20 September 2005 11:10
|
|
norton antivirus corporate edition i find is very good...
only time it slows down are finishing transfers va MSN, but apart from that i never notice..
also free updates forever 
lemme know if you want to trial it. (28meg, my upload should be faster than your download )
|
|
|
Location:
sydney
Registered:
August 2003
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Tue, 20 September 2005 11:23
|
|
agreed 
best investment i ever made 
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
September 2004
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Tue, 20 September 2005 17:35
|
|
I just download the trial tonight
McAfee is definitely faster than Norton. If you're going to get Norton and you're competent with computers disable the startup scan for sure. Just wait until everything loads and then run it manually. Ugh.
I've only been infected with a trojan/spyware once and that was because my sister decided to open a stupid looking e-mail. I've never had my computer fux0red (except me screwing around with system settings lol) and I've never used an antivirus program.
I just downloaded Norton and McAfee to double check my computer is clean again and now I've uninstalled them.
Really it is quite hard to f&ck your computer up if you know what you're doing.
Also, use firefox. IE is slower, less secure and more prone to nasties.
|
|
|
I Supported Toymods
Location:
Casula
Registered:
January 2005
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Tue, 20 September 2005 21:32
|
|
I use McAfee spam killer/Virus scan and have never had any problems with my computer.
It surprises me how many people still open emails,or attachments from people they don't know. If I don't know who sent it it's deleted.
I don't know how true it is, but I heard a rumor at one stage that some viruses where written using a Nortons based program. so some of them get though because Nortons thinks it's ok.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|
|
Location:
Perth
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Tue, 20 September 2005 23:23
|
|
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 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.
|
|
|
Location:
new castle
Registered:
July 2005
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Wed, 21 September 2005 05:18
|
|
yeah virus protection is all good. should really get something like spybot search & destroy aswell, as its alot better for shitty spyware programs.
wanna know best way to not get virus's......dont connect to the internet...at all
|
|
|
Location:
Cabramatta, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Wed, 21 September 2005 05:29
|
|
Or run Linux. Virus writers don't really bother with Linux even if they could crack it. 
Or even better, run Linux from CD! With a dual BIOS motherboard.
|
|
|
Location:
Land of Oz
Registered:
June 2004
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Wed, 21 September 2005 06:11
|
|
Hi,
..... or run OSX with your cute colourful Apple, wearing your salmon man-pink shirt....
seeyuzz
river
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
July 2004
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Wed, 21 September 2005 06:34
|
|
| river wrote on Wed, 21 September 2005 14:11 |
Hi,
..... or run OSX with your cute colourful Apple, wearing your salmon man-pink shirt....
seeyuzz
river
|
see... adelaide is already changing you!
|
|
|
Location:
Perth
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Wed, 21 September 2005 10:26
|
|
| hamgatan wrote on Wed, 21 September 2005 10:01 |
| 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.
|
Thankyou for the enlightenment.
I don't run unlicensed antivirus software. The vast majority of my internet usage is actually using my corporate laptops running full licenses for everything.
My bank was hacked after a Trojan was found by NAV immediately after I logged off my bank account, NAV found the trojan, let it access my computer and was not able to do anything to fight it.
Nothing to do with phishing or any other scams.
The bank fraud section identified the hack as being a Trojan and my account was actually hacked after the bank's security system had identified an attack, closed my account and the hacker still broke through!
That was the last time I used NAV or any firewall, security by Symantec.
Many, many times we have run AVG on PCs installed with Norton or Macafee. Every time AVG has identified viruses not found by the other software.
Thanks for the definition of nuked! What I meant was completely fucked by some virus or whatever when using NAV and Macafee, many times. All your theory sounds interesting, but in the real world people like me know what works or doesn't.
Uneducated comment?? Just talking from real world experience, working internationally with high end data processing and data acquisition for many years.
You sound like an advertisement for NAV and Macafee, who pays you?? 
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
July 2004
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Wed, 21 September 2005 16:55
|
|
| Blown86 wrote on Wed, 21 September 2005 18:26 |
Thankyou for the enlightenment.
I don't run unlicensed antivirus software. The vast majority of my internet usage is actually using my corporate laptops running full licenses for everything.
My bank was hacked after a Trojan was found by NAV immediately after I logged off my bank account, NAV found the trojan, let it access my computer and was not able to do anything to fight it.
Nothing to do with phishing or any other scams.
The bank fraud section identified the hack as being a Trojan and my account was actually hacked after the bank's security system had identified an attack, closed my account and the hacker still broke through!
That was the last time I used NAV or any firewall, security by Symantec.
Many, many times we have run AVG on PCs installed with Norton or Macafee. Every time AVG has identified viruses not found by the other software.
Thanks for the definition of nuked! What I meant was completely fucked by some virus or whatever when using NAV and Macafee, many times. All your theory sounds interesting, but in the real world people like me know what works or doesn't.
Uneducated comment?? Just talking from real world experience, working internationally with high end data processing and data acquisition for many years.
You sound like an advertisement for NAV and Macafee, who pays you??
|
i stand corrected. i apologise for my assumption based on that it was a dodgy copy. you can see how i came to that conclusion however.
regardless of what av you were using. antivirus will not stop a hacker. thats not what its designed to do. for someone desperate enough to use a blended trojan to pilfer your details, one attack will eventually get through the so called wall of security. AVG might be good at the desktop end for what it is, but its not a Firewall, neither is Symantec AV or McAfee VScan Ent 8.0i for that matter. you cant expect a virus defense program to totally secure your system.. someone with real world experience should know that security isnt just revolvant around an antivirus.
the usual scenario for most corporates these days anyway is laptops that can dial up / hook in via ethernet/gprs pcmcia.. but dont allow traffic through unless the corporate gateway connection is established through VPN. Not only from a security perspective is this important, but it also adheres to QA Standards regarding acceptable Internet use policies enforced by a company (Being tracked and logged). A decent setup would include a VPN connection tunnel past the corporate firewall into an authenticated server (whether it be Active Directory or hardware based like Checkpoint), but still then traffic should be generated past Proxy style gateways or Gateway Devices like the Symantec SGS Series, McAfee's SCM 3x00 Series, Barracuda, Cisco, Blah blah the list goes on.. Multi Tiered Protection, Its how things are done these days..
(by the way i personally have a large dislike for Symantec and its not simply because of their products, but also their internal administration and the politics involved internally within the company.. SAVCE v10 has been a flop and many corporates are moving to Trend/McAfee because of it)
regarding real world people, just to give you an indication, i manage 1000-15000 desktop enterprise clients and their software licensing contracts..
oh and Microsoft pays me quite well for it..
|
|
|
Location:
Perth
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Wed, 21 September 2005 17:56
|
|
You're right about the firewall system and limitations of standalone antivirus.
Our head offices have extreme firewalls and all the fruit. I run field jobs often in 3rd world countries where quite often we can't even run VPN due to weird conflicts with local servers etc, we have dispensations for QA and use more standard protection.
I'm operating on a Vsat at the moment so security is very good through a Belgian server, but sometimes the only choice is local ISP's and you get hits continuously.
All this is a real eye opener to what really works in the fundamental sense and what has too much BS attached ie Symantec.
Risky letting it be known you work for Microsoft!!
|
|
|
Location:
Cabramatta, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Wed, 21 September 2005 23:22
|
|
| hamgatan wrote on Thu, 22 September 2005 02:55 |
oh and Microsoft pays me quite well for it..
|
You work for Micro$haft?!
Now where'd I put my ban button...
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
July 2004
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Thu, 22 September 2005 00:31
|
|
aye i hear u.. 3rd world countries arent fun when it comes to technological advancement.
oh and just to clarify i dont work directly for microsoft, but one of their ten appointed LAR's in australia.. my revenue = microsoft rebates and special thank you on large contracts.. microsoft are far too arrogant a company for me to happily work there.. haha
|
|
|
Location:
Perth
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Thu, 22 September 2005 00:46
|
|
|
Hah!!! you sound like your just as much a whore as me!! Except I do something real...
|
|
|
Location:
Parramatta
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: Norton vs McAfee anti virus
|
Thu, 22 September 2005 02:22
|
|
this is how i do it i dont like nortons because of the system resorses it uses (unless its corprate) its just crap, and requries too much configuring in the firewall. McAfees not bad i use to use this i would rate it better then notorns.
However my current setup which i am very happy with is Nod32 i recive updates everyday and it seems to do its job very well. I also use a third party software for the firewall being zone alarm its free and its simply amazing, this i belive is surperior to nortaons and mcafees firewall. zone alarms also have a spyware function also and this works well to. i belive this is the most secure setup i have had as a home user. Also behind a NAT enabled router you will be almost untocable so long as you dont go opening ports willy nilly.
|
|
|
