Detection tool lands Symantec a patent

Too bad it can never clean anything after it detects it.
Great scanner - horrible remover.

 

OK This does not refer to any detection improvement, this technolgy is there for a long time now...See this news article:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Patents play an increasingly important role in Symantec’s strategy, as Microsoft tries to elbow its way into the digital security market and price competition drives down revenues. But Michael Schallop, Symantec’s director of intellectual property, refuses to say if the company will pursue litigation. “We don’t generally discuss how we will leverage this patent against competitors or others,” he said."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

From The Red herring (redherring.com):

http://www.redherring.com/Article.a...ent&sector=Capital&subsector=EconomyAndPolicy

 

Another marketing scam. I've see a lot of crappy patented products. The new patented Sony DVD encryption protocol was cracked in a few hours! Macrovision touted a new encryption scheme last week. This one will also be cracked in hours as it hits the market.

 

Yes, and to defend themselves MacroVision said that their product is not perfect and may be cracked, but it still offers good protection at least for a while etc....

This Symantec patent is not 'crackable' its an integral part of the product. It can give Symantec power to sue every AV out there (possibly).

Maybe McAfee will sign another patent or something....

 

The scumbags at Symantec are learning to play the same legal game like RAMBUS. I warned those in this forum not to touch SYMC when it was hammered a few months back. This PIG is still sitting 60 cents above the recent low.

Security should be FREE. Watch as MSFT gains momentum in the AV/Spyware business.

 

Maybe we should have warned them better not to buy Norton....buying of their products got their stocks up (of course) and now they have the money to pull this thing off which I believe is unreasonable...

 

Norton got a patent?!?!

What the....

Their "technology" is old news. What about the AV's that actually work and detect viruses not soley based on a definition file. (i.e. NOD32, KAV, etc..)
The only reason they got this patent is because they have the $$$ to back it up.

What's next...Windows98 getting patented for its security?

Good Grief...

 

Insiders were selling like FELONS, for "diversification". Didn't short at the peak, but I can't complain since my average price was just under 31.

My last SYMC product was Norton SystemWorks 2001. BA employees get McAfee 7.0i for free. Avast Home is another excellent FREE alternative. Course I still see NOOBS at Best Buy asking for Norton Antivirus. That too, will change in the near future with increase use of broad band.

My $ is with MSFT!

 

What does broadband usage have to do with choice of AV And what's with the elitist rhetoric? Are you saying everyone {such as myself} who uses NAV is an idiot? Perhaps I am misunderstanding but I really don't appreciate such rhetoric.

 

Randy_Bell,

I do NOT say that you are an idiot; I agree that NAV is a nice product and has good detection too, problems if any all boil down to user needs and PC configuration.

But this patent is something I do not approve of...I mean, it is unfair to sue companies just because they're using similar technology....My article mentioned only McAfee and Microsoft, does KAV, ArcaVir, NOD32 and others apply too?

Best Regards,
Firecat

 

Use what you want, since it's your $ to burn. Even McAfee users are now getting daily update. I'm perfectly happy with Avast Home.

Broad band providers will continue to give away FREE AV solution to their customers.

 

Only corporate users.

http://forums.mcafeehelp.com/viewtopic.php?t=42302

Acadia

 

And people with McAfee VirusScan Home/Pro 7.0 too.

 

OK thanks, so that's what you meant, hehe .. you mentioned broadband out of the blue and I couldn't make the connection with AV choice .. hehe ..

 

The AV is most effective with the most up-to-date virus definition file. I've encountered WAY TOO MANY Norton systems with outdated definition file. Those running Avast have always been okay. The Avast update is also very small (30KB). The average weekly update for Norton is approximately 500KB.

 

I'm a die-hard NOD32 user and reseller and it my top recommendation. I have had Norton (with latest defs) not recognize a file that NOD32 caught easily.

Norton is a great AV, don't get me wrong, for novice users. But for those of us that like to push our systems to the limit and see what we can do, it is just too much of a resource hog and heuristics might as well not even exist.

 

I think that says it all ... about your impartiality .. no offense. Being a reseller means you have vested interest in pushing a particular product.

I happen to agree that NOD32 is a great AV but I don't need to put down another AV in order to say that. I have for longtime exchanged samples with my friends, some of whom use NOD32. I can say with confidence that NAV detects some new samples which NOD misses, and vice versa .. they are roughly equivalent in detection rate .. IMHO.

One cannot base conclusions on a single sample amongst the many tens of thousands of possible samples.

 

Actually i cant believe some people who make comments about norton have retried it .
2005 does not slow my system down,in realtime .With on demand scan running it does slow me down but i dont mind this .
Nod slowed my system down just the opposit.With nod everything had a slight delay when opening.

 

@waters: Those are good points but I think everyone's system is unique: some will find slowdowns with NAV running resident, others won't. Same applies to the varied experiences with other AVs - that is why often our arguments are futile because we are arguing different experiences based on different systems. My experience with all versions of NAV {including the latest 2005 version} has been positive but I realize not everyone has had the same experience.

@Capp: I forgot to say that I agree with you about NOD's AH, it *is* quite impressive; NAV, and indeed most AVs with exception of maybe McAfee and Dr. Web, don't have nearly so good heuristics. And while we're at it, if we want to discuss best overall detection rate, I think that has to be KAV.

 

Yes i agree and thats what i am trying to say.
But how often do you see the advice ,dont use that is is a resorce hog.

 

... and I often see folks in this forum slam dunking Norton for being so huge, yet I see them singing the praises of GData. Norton2005 is a 25mb download, GData is 50mb; don't believe me, check their websites.

Acadia

 

wow you an idiot, AVAST! PFFFT!!!!!! talk about bad...... even norman has beaten AVAST! lol

 

Where exactly? Any proof? And please define "even Norman has beaten avast!". I don't care about VB100% tests because they are generally useless. Let's be honest and agree that many people just don't trust avast! because Alwil offers Home Edition for free.
But from other side it has a very fast response on outbreaks and other ITW stuff plus it was even a bit better than PAYABLE Trend Micro and SOPHOS in AV-cmparatives test (Feb 2005). Now thats something isn't it? Fast and small incrimental updates are just cherry on the top,trust me.