Norton Power Eraser

ComboFix is a great tool created by sUBs who is now part of MBAM and officially works for them (AFAIK) as a malware researcher or something like that . His tool (ComboFix) , although very good at cleaning malware and traces , generates too much false positives . I use it almost daily and I have seen way many false positives and auto-deletions of legitimate Windows files. If it is the same in MBAM ,,,

 

That's great but I don't think that Norton Power Eraser is a direct competion of MBAM . MBAM offers no full security suit , no antivirus , no firewall , no nothing and MBAM doesn't benefit from free users except from the fact that MBAM has become very popular among Internet community . This popularity might make users of free MBAM buy the paid version but I have seen lots of users who dislike the paid MBAM version and prefer the free one.

Although Norton 2010 misses less malware , if it happens and someone goes to Norton Community , gurus there always tell him/her to download MBAM or SAS . Symantec have noticed that because MBAM most of the times clean something that Norton has missed . Symantec , of course , don't want another vendor products to be present on their users' computers and that is why Norton Power Eraser was released - (1) to aggressively remove malware Norton might have missed and (2) to keep another vendors' free product out of users' machines . This will make Symantec in better position. With the free product Symantec will gain more popularity and will gain more users because Symantec offers full set of security products (unlikely MBAM)

 

Unless I missed something , this crap found 23 risks . ALL of which are false positives . A few examples ....Panda , SuperAntiSpyware , ISR monitor etc . Sheesh . How is this good ? And this was on NORMAL setting !!

 

Well, we probably missed the real purpose of this tool? This might be the beta version of universal competitive product uninstaller/cleaner after all.

 

Who cares.. its Beta. The experts on the Norton Community forums says that there is a bug that causing the over aggressiveness. This will be fixed soon. But I will say again, MBAM is in trouble and they know it. I think Symantec is tired of MBAM taking pot shots at them, and I am sure this is true for other Tier 1 vendors as well.

Now Symantec is competing on the same terms as MBAM. You want better detection at the cost of more false positives ? You got it!

 

I wish this were the case. There are some really crappy security products out there that just copy whatever Symantec does, taking scraps that fall off the table. Problem is that the market is so large, that even the scraps are enough to keep these upstarts running.

 

Oh come on please: don't start again with saying it is like MBAM.
It is a system rescue tool. That's what they say: Norton Rescue Tools, and: You should only use with nothing else helps.
Has nothing to do with competition for MBAM. If this is Symantec's interpretation of what MBAM is they are really wrong.

 

I LOLed. NPE will never compete with MBAM. Symantec can make all the excuses they want, but in the end we all know they are trying to wipe out competitors with this tool regardless of if its a beta or not. Not to mention it will just go back to its bloated ways like it does every couple years and I bet they tack on a price tag after the beta period is over.

Its just like MRG's review. This is the exact tool Doktornotor described. Flags everything.

 

Of course . And they can do it. There is nothing wrong in that !

Oh , come on ! Norton 2011 is lighter than ever , installs much faster than version 2010 does , runs much quicker . Insight in better than ever , not to mention the numerous improvements in SONAR . And it is all automated . Norton 2009 , 2010 and 2011 are in no way bloatware.

Look , Kas*****y , with all of its functions and options for advanced users - this is bloatware.

 

They have done it before and they will return to their roots just like they do every time.

 

In each and every company it is all about people who work there and those who make the company . Unless people there change , it can't happen.

 

It can happen and it will happen. You think every time a big company under goes changes the only reason they change or revert back to old ways is because the management changed? I dont think so. You think things dont change at companies where employees and managers have had 15+ years of service. Yea right.

 

Well , we can't see the future . Should it happens , I can stop supporting them easily . It doesn't seems to happen in near future , though.

 

Errr, you know - intentionally marking legitimate and harmless competitor's software as malware is illegal in most civilized countries. Actually, it's even worse in this case, look at how they descibe the tool:

Etc. etc. etc.
This can result in both civil and criminal liability. They'd better fix their broken "rescue tools" quickly.

 

Don't worry, they'll fix it. It's beta and apparently has a bug.

It didn't flag:

MBAM, SUPERAntiSpyware, Spybot, Hitman Pro, Avira Rescue Disk, Dr. Web CureIt or PREVXCSIFREE

on my machine.

Also, it won't become bloatware again for at least another 10 years.

 

This is MORE than a bug . It detected nothing but legitimate software INCLUDING SuperAntiSpyware on my machine . A bug ? LMAO !!!! Again , 23 different detections here of nothing but legitimate software . A bug is having a few false positives . This program needs to be completely redone !

 

Well... it seemed to specifically target well-known security apps here as well. Oh, and Firefox. Also, as already said by someone else above - if this tool is indeed reputation-based, well - then it's broken beyond repair.

 

The "scareware" they are referring to are competitor programs that Norton is "scared" of.

 

Perhaps you can't get over they'll succedd in what they are doing .
Not that you can't , you simply don't want to understand it is a very first BETA version . And it clearly states that it is a last layer .

And as a last layer when everything else failed but a malware is still present , one can get over the fact that NPE might remove Photoshop's exe or MBAM but will save everything else.

It is not built-in the program's engine nor is into the suit . When Norton 2011 scans and at the end it finishes , a link to the free recovery tools are give in case sb needs to use them.

If you call some of us Norton fanboys , you should be Norton haters . And because Norton haters has turned this thread into showing the disadvantages of the NPE utility only , I'll turn it upside down. The positive is that it is really capabale of detecting and removing malware that Norton 2010 or SEP hasn't detected . As I deal with malware infested computer daily , I have used it to scan badly infected computers with and the results are amazing. The great is that caught the real problem in just a minute . And even though it might produce a false positive , at the end one can select and/or deselect what to remove and what to keep . Reboot and there you go - the machine is back to normal in 3-4 minutes time.

 

Even as a beta, that detects based on ratings, this system is flawed beyond belief. So far it flags Thunderbird which is a Outlook competitor, FF which is an IE competitor, MBAM who detects all sorts of things NIS doesnt, Private FW which is a FW competitor to NIS and Windows built in FW, and Im sure the list goes on. Notice a trend yet?

On the flip side you say this is great at detection yet it hasnt detected a single thing thats even slightly harmful.

Beta or not this is pathetic. You can say what you want, but the truth is these statements are based on cold hard facts that have been presented in this very thread. It has nothing to do with hating Norton. If MBAM had these pathetic FP's Id say something, but it doesnt flag Thunderbird, it doesnt flag Private FW, it doesnt flag Nortons products or Windows products. Perhaps its time to agree that we disagree and have opposite view points here.

 

First , it is not based on cloud scanning/reputation ONLY . There are other things , too . I can prove it with a malware sample I got on Thursday . It got a Good (3) rating but NPE removed it and it was real malware Symantec Security Response has added.

Second , ... do you expect your computer to be infected by saying "yet it hasn't detected a single thing thats even slightly harmful" . If it has detected something harmfull , this would only be a proof that your security setup is not that good.

Don't ever compare MBAM with NPE - nothing to compare . Plus MBAM has been out for years , NPE is very first beta very specific cases utility

 

Since you feel like carrying this on. You have yet to provide a single ounce of proof. Even as a beta that is no excuse for its pathetic detection rate and its extremely high amount of false positives for known and proven programs. Seems as if your a Norton fanboy and your only ounce of argument is that: "oh this detection is awesome its a beta, I can forgive it". Ignorance is bliss.

 

NPE is a utility intended for Symantec/Norton customers . Even though it might remain free of charge to use it , again - it is intended for Norton customers infected by malware that all the excellent protection and prevention layers in Norton have somehow missed .
Not to mention all the layers a malware should bypass Norton has IPS/Firewall , SafeWeb , Insight and Auto-Protect , Download Insight , SONAR , Insight Network scan . Even if something passes all these , then NPE might come to help . I don't know what proof you actually want .

As this is intended for Norton customers , even though it is free , you as a AVIRA and MBAM user are not obligated to use it. Have fun with AVIRA's FPs . Norton as product doesn't have that much , actually it has quite a few.

 

Where does it say on the NPE description page that its intended for Norton users? It doesnt. Therefore its not meant to supplement other Norton products. As someone has already pointed out:

Its intended to remove "scareware", "rogueware", and crimeware. Yet it hasnt detectioned anything that falls into any of those categories. The only thing it has detected is competitor products that are "scareware" because Norton is losing market share and they are terrified of that.

Have you ever seen Thunderbird, MBAM, Private FW, FF, or any of the other bogus detections that NPE has produced "trick you into unknowingly download threats to your PC or have bogus pop up alerts or security messages that scare you into thinking your PC has been infected"?

 

Why must software lovers of certain products be blind to what is wrong ? I have no problem with false positives as I know what I can and cannot get rid of . BUT , when this application flags all good program , most well known at that , I have to challenge anyone that does not see this . This program is awful right now . 3GUSER has 1 false positive ? Wow ! Congratulations . Seems you are the only one . A program that is made to remove nasties will have some false positives . But , in my case , 21 of my 23 falsies were well known . The other two were good but , most may not know this . I will write it one more time ....This needs to go back to the shop and be completely revamped . If it only happens on one computer , so be it but , that is enough for me to say it does not work properly . Will it detect bad stuff ? I have no reason to doubt it . I do have reason however ; to say not to use it to anyone not knowing what they are doing . I know for a fact it detects things that it has absolutely no business detecting .
White D guy .
I am in total agreement with you here . And the good doktor , I laughed where you wrote " if this tool is indeed reputation-based, well - then it's broken beyond repair." How true . Just looking at the program , this should be an Alpha and not be used on any machines unless you are sure of what you are doing . I am just trying to help anyone that might read this and think WOW , a new application that might fix me . This one AIN'T it !! Keep looking !!