Strike II: Symantec Support gone rogue

Your experience proves that quality can vary greatly depending on which technician you're working with. The fact that you had a good experience doesn't prove their isn't a bigger problem though. Quality support has to be consistent and reliable, and it must not be confused with marketing. Pressuring customers to buy expensive "premium" support options is not acceptable.

 

Providing quality support has to be difficult in any large organization, so I wouldn't single out Symantec alone, I suspect you will see similar problems in any similarly large business. I agree on pressuring customers to buy though, that is no good, and should be quickly remedied.

 

Thanks for the link.

 

What time was this ??
From what I hear, they changed their support provider/policy in the last few months.

 

Guys, honestly put this into perspective.... within a big company you will inevitably run into problems such as this especially when you are either expanding at a very fast rate or have a very big client base and have not made enough provision for it.

What you will tend to find is that business support is spot on from almost all vendors because it has to be, but home user support is sometimes stretched too far, outsourced and the technicians aren't given enough training or aimed at only the most common and "small" problems so any real bughunting or serious problem reports take a while to move up to the "real" techs at level 2 or higher which makes it very frustrating for the user.

The main thing in such a situation is how the management respond to such reports....and give a clear outline as to the measures they are taking to improve the technical support provision and remedy the highlighted problems.

 

The only reason they use MBAM is because it is often recommended in the forums and users have experienced immense success.

 

That's not the issue, the issue is they should be using their OWN products....unless they don't have any faith in them. I'd think it would be a big no-no to be using a competitors software to fix something on your users' systems. If your product does not fix the issue, RECOMMEND them downloading another free scanner to see if it helps, but you don't use it yourself to fix your users' issues.

In any case, they need to straighten up and fly right, they don't need more criticism right now.

 

Is it even legal for Symantec support techs to use MBAM? I don't have access to the EULA at the moment, but I do know that Malwarebytes has corporate licensing. It also seems pretty pathetic for an anti-malware company to use a competitor's software to remove infections.

 

That is all true, but doesn't speak to the issue of manipulating customers into paying for services when they call for support.

 

ASK Toolbar used to be spyware. It's an open question if this is still the case. From Wikipedia:

Like many other ad-supported client software products (including other search toolbars), the Ask toolbar(s) were labeled in the past as malware or spyware by several anti-spyware providers, mostly due to the actions of distribution partners who were discovered to have taken advantage of known Windows exploits to self-install advertising-delivery programs without the computer user's knowledge or consent. The spyware accusations peaked in 2005- 2006 as the Ask toolbars were labeled as spyware by many leading anti-spyware providers, such as Spybot, McAfee, TrendMicro, and others. [12] [13] Since then, Ask claims they have severed ties with the partners whose practices earned the Ask toolbar a reputation as spyware and current anti-spyware results seem to support those claims.[citation needed]

The Ask toolbar can easily be uninstalled from Firefox/Internet Explorer, but the search 'functionality' is a bit more difficult to remove, as the software changes the default search used for keywords entered via the address bar.[14].​

I haven't found any reliable confirmation that ASK is without spyware.

 

A very good article about Norton/Symantec's new bed fellow here: http://www.benedelman.org/spyware/ask-toolbars/

 

My beef isn't with the support staff using it, but the fact that the customer most likely thinks it is Symantec's own diagnostic tool.

The support staff should say:

Norton: 'Hey buddy, I recommend you keep Norton AND pay for and run MBAM, which is fantastic software. It gets rid of the problem stuff all AVs miss. And we use it here'.

Customer: 'You sure?'

Norton: 'Yeah bud, it's a lifetime license and cheaper than a one-year Norton renewal. You can't get better than that. And if you pick it up, I'll help you set it up alongside Norton, as two programs monitoring your system are better than one.'

Customer: 'Thanks!'


Will that ever happen? No chance. Should it happen? For sure. You got to give credit where credit is due - and MBAM should be recommended by Symantec staff, and installed on customers' systems, especially if Symantec's staff are even using it.

 

It was 7th of february this year. Haven't heard anything about the policy change. It looks the same in NIS 2009 as it has all the time. I think you get the support from India, but I'm not 100% sure on that.


Cheers

 

Yes, its from India. From their centers in Chennai and Pune.

I guess then its probable the malware technical support team or something similar that is doing all this.

 

Customer: How come I have to pay for somebody else's software? I trusted that yours would work?

Norton: Um, well, you see...

Customer: Also, why would I want to run two real-time apps that do the same thing? Are you aware that causes conflicts?

Norton: Well, um, yes....I'll tell you what....


Customer: Ok, I'll try out MBAM, and if it gets rid of my problem easily, I'll snap it up...of course, you know what this means for your product, right?

Norton: Um.

Customer: Thank you for your assistance, have a wonderful day.

*End chat session*

Norton: *facepalm*


That's what happens when you put a customer with a brain into the equasion.

 

Just out of interest, I looked at MBAM's forums and the moderator there isn't bothered by it, rather, sees it as a positive. Customers see another program cleaning their system and look to buy/download it.

http://www.malwarebytes.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=12263

So maybe it turns out into good thing afterall (supporting MBAM)?

 

How do you define spyware?

A) MBAM does not replace AV software, as stated by the publisher.
B) I can't trust a product 100% of the time when it only detects 95% of adware. In Neil's case, it sounded like he had a bad adware infection (hijacked desktop background).

MBAM has corporate licensing and let's not make any assumptions.

Reading the MBAM ELUA (it's only a page long), it states "Not to use this software for commercial use without proper licensing."

 

Agree with you TechOutsider. About my comments, they are just personal views, no facts. Where I'm from, we're always 'betting' on everything.

 

After contacting Symantec Support, I recieved no definite answer about the use of MBAM. The first agent said it was not allowed to use products other than Norton-branded ones. Another agent, wanted to see the publication, and concluded it was unreliable b/c it was not published by Symantec...

 

From one ANY perspective;
Symnatec has apparently gone beserk.

I've been a -mostly- happy Symantec user since Norton days, but all of this is leaving a really bad taste

I've been reading around the 2 really significant issues:
Support using MBAM in an unlicensed fashion
AND
the ASK.com shemozzle.



This appears to be the most utd summation with some useful links:
http://securitygarden.blogspot.com/2009/03/recommendation-replace-norton.html
Kudos to CoU for keeping the vigil and the delisting.

I used the email addy posted earlier.
John Tompson (CEO of Symantec)
jwthompson@symantec.com
Who knows if that'll get through ...but..cant hurt: I hope his e-mail server is going ddos.

 

Interesting article there Longboard. Summarises what many people are thinking. In case people haven't clicked on your link, key part of article is below.

 

That HAS to be one of the most dirty, underhanded tactics I have EVER seen and read in AV history.

The Norton representative(s) should've just said it straight that he used a free version of MBAM, instead of labeling it a "Norton" product.

MalwareBytes? Norton product? Dream on, pal. Dream on.

EDIT: Though I won't really be surprised if they soon decide to purchase MalwareBytes like they did PCTools.

 

I'd like to offer some perspective on this: usually the support staff is not to blame, but the company which is unwilling to pay enough for decent tech support.
Can you really blame tech support people for having a bigger workload than they can handle, or being insufficiently trained ? They just need to make a living.

 

someone said that support was indian and is this the indian representative or do nortons give out support from India?

 

Maybe it was just an ind. at the company who had success with MBAM and tried it on and ind.'s computer.