NIS tests?

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by JerryM, Nov 1, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    I am considering keeping NIS 2013 as I had a crash and returned to an image that had NIS. It has always run without a hitch on my computers, but I wonder how its protection is since Norton is no participating in the AV-C tests.

    Are there any reliable and relatively non biased tests that include Norton these days?

    Thanks,
    Jerry
     
  2. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
  3. Cudni

    Cudni Global Moderator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Posts:
    6,956
    Location:
    Somethingshire
    test or no test still a good solution.
     
  4. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    Thanks, guys for the help.
    Jerry
     
  5. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    PC Magazine reviewed it: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2409925,00.asp?amp

    Pros
    Top malware removal score in PCMag's test; high ratings from independent labs. Intelligent firewall. Excellent exploit blocking. Accurate antispam and antiphishing. Scan insight flags potentially dangerous websites. Updated behavioral detection. Links with other Norton products/services.

    Cons
    Good-not-great score in PCMag's malware blocking test. Minor effect on system performance.

    Bottom Line
    Norton Internet Security is a consistent winner, and the 2013 edition is no exception. With its collection of top-notch components Norton remains an Editors' Choice


    Results appear similar to NIS 2012. Its SONAR real-time protection appears to be its weakest link. Norton products by and large have shied away from heavy browser scanning probably as to not impact performance as evidenced by KIS, Avast, and the like. Norton catches it when the malware tries to install.

    I can personally vouch for it's exploit protection. It has twice stopped hack toolkits dead in their tracks on my WIN 7 x64 installation.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2012
  6. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    Thanks, itman. I appreciate the assessment. I have used several AVs that I like, and run well. However, none has been quiet so trouble free as Norton in spite of the dislike for it here.

    Jerry
     
  7. entropism

    entropism Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Posts:
    331
    I agree completely. I used to be dead set against Norton (from years back), and dead set against paid AV solutions in general. When I was using Comcast, they offered Norton 360 for free and it worked flawlessly for me, but when I switched carriers I couldn't get anything that worked as well. I tried Bullguard, Bitdefender, Avast, Kaspersky, plus a few others. There were small issues with all of them, so I ended up getting a cheap 360 license off ebay. Couldn't be happier.
     
  8. Victek

    Victek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    5,123
    Location:
    USA
    The big improvement for the Norton products came in 2009 and I ran NIS2009 through NIS2012. They were all generally well behaved and I would recommend any of latest (NAV, NIS, N360) with a couple of caveats. One, I can't figure out what real value the performance monitoring feature offers and it adds a significant load on the system, so I recommend disabling it especially on lower end computers. Two, the Auto-Protect component remains weak when it comes to "scareware/ransomware". Just recently I had two customers catch the fake "the FBI has locked your computer, send two hundred dollars" ransomware. Note this has been making the rounds for at least a year - it's not a new "zero day" threat. Both PCs were running fully updated Norton 360 (2012). On one PC N360 was able to kill the malware in memory when the system was rebooted, but it didn't find and remove the executable from the disk. I used MBAM to clean up. So, an "on demand" scanner, such as MBAM, is needed for backup. It's a good idea to educate customers to use an On-Demand scanner on a regular basis to make sure nothing is being missed.
     
  9. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    Hi Victec,

    I am persuaded that MBAM adds a very necessary layer. I have found that if I disable MBAM starting with Windows my machine boots much faster. After the AV starts and smooths out I enable MBAM.

    I have a couple of friends that got a rogue although Norton was up to date. It took a Quick Scan of MBAM to find and remove the rogue.

    Thanks for the comment.
    Jerry
     
  10. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    I will also add for people still on XP, you can't get better protection than NIS 2013. XP's firewall sucks; everyone knows that one. XP's main vulnerability is rootkits due to inadequate kernerl protection. NIS is tops when it comes to rootkit protection.
     
  11. Sportscubs1272

    Sportscubs1272 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Posts:
    340
    It is a shame that it costs more to renew a Norton subscription than just buying another license on Amazon.com. I haven't had any trouble with NIS while running Windows 8 on my laptop. The Action Center thought my Norton Anti-spyware and Firewall weren't running, but I clicked it off for a day or so. It seems to be okay for now. :D
     
  12. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    If your on WIN 7, just set the MBAMService service to start delayed automatic. This was the setting btw prior to the current version of MBAM Pro.
     
  13. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    Thanks.
    Jerry
     
  14. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    I
    MBAM is designed to detect 0-day malware. It is probably the strongest retail available protection against rogues.

    Considering MBAM Pro's modest cost($15 -$29) and lifetime license, everyone really should have it installed.

    Also many rogues are unwittingly "invited in" by clicking on an e-mail link or attachment. Most AV scanners including NIS only support POP3 or SMTP e-mail. So if you use AOL mail or your ISP's e-mail, you can get nailed.
     
  15. markcc

    markcc Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Posts:
    185
    Location:
    Michigan, usa
    I wish Norton would give the user more control in certain areas. I don't like the idle scan. Why can't we disable it? When the program finds a virus, the user has no control over what happens. The firewall logs are not as detailed as Kaspersky or Outposts logs. Norton wants to keep the users isolated from any decisions or interactions. For people that want to know what is happening, this is not the program for you. Now they are not participating in some of the tests.
     
  16. Victek

    Victek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    5,123
    Location:
    USA
    You're right that the Norton products are by default as fully automated as possible. it's a good choice for a great many people, but not the best if you're more knowledgeable and want more control. I hadn't heard about Symantec not participating in some tests - which tests and why?
     
  17. markcc

    markcc Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Posts:
    185
    Location:
    Michigan, usa

    Please look here http://www.av-comparatives.org/ They used to participate in this one & now do not. Most of the major players do.
     
  18. JRCATES

    JRCATES Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2005
    Posts:
    1,203
    Location:
    USA
    When they were included in the testing, they scored very well (among the best)....so their exclusion doesn't have to do with results.

    From the sound of it, this particular scenario seems a bit like Matousec excluding Online Armor from it's firewall testing (or Online Armor refusing to participate). Those with the knowledge, however, realize that Online Armor is an extremely good firewall, just like Norton is an extremely good antivirus, and don't let it's exclusion from one testing site affect their decision to use the product.

    Here is an example of the results from around the time that Norton/Symantec was participating in the AV-Comparatives.org tests:

    http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/docs/avc_prot_201012_en.pdf

    .
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2012
  19. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    You can, but it's a bit tricky. This is for NAV 2012. Might be a tad different for NIS.

    Go to Advanced Settings, then Computer Protection. Then Scan Now. Then Custom Scan. Checkmark Quick Scan and the select Edit Scan and schedule when you want it to run.
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2012
  20. kdcdq

    kdcdq Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Posts:
    657
    Location:
    Southwestern Massachusetts
    I have disinfected dozens of machines running various flavors of Norton over the last few years. Not all of the infected machines were running the latest releases of Norton and some had out-of-date malware databases when infected, but some systems were fully patched and running the latest/greatest/most-up-to-date-databases.

    I can not recall having ever seen any infected machines running both Norton and MBAM Pro. I am running MBAM Pro with WSA effectively at the present.

    The above statements are based on my many years of experience; your highway may vary.
     
  21. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    Thanks, that is useful information from one "who has been there."
    Jerry
     
  22. tomdy2k

    tomdy2k Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Posts:
    174
    Can MBAM run real time alongside norton?:blink:
     
  23. vojta

    vojta Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Posts:
    830
    Yes, I'm running both in real time without a problem. MBAM tries to work alongside every antivirus and I'm under the impression that Norton is one of those that receive special care from MBAM's developers.
     
  24. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    To avoid problems and conflicts, best to add the recommended exceptions to both NIS/NAV and MBAM Pro. Go to the MBAM forum and check in the FAQ section for necessary exceptions: http://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=10138&st=0&p=215158&#entry215158. The instructions are for Norton 360 but also apply to NAV/NIS. Ignore the swissarmy exception for WIN 7 x64.

    You can also search the MBAM forum posts for specific instructions for NIS exceptions.

    On my WIN 7 x64 SP1 installation, for my MBAM Pro installtion I exclude;

    C:\Program Files (x86)\Norton AntiVirus.

    For NAV 2012 exclusions, I exclude;

    C:\Progam Files (x86)\MalwareBytes' Antimalware
    C:\Program Data\MalwareBytes
    C:\Windows\System32\drivers\mbam.sys
     
  25. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    I can't dispute this since I use the same combination.

    However over two years of running both NAV 2012 and MBAM Pro realtime, the only thing I saw from MBAM Pro was an occasional IP block. I have never seen MBAM Pro block any malware either realtime or in a non-realtime scan.

    NAV however with its IPS has blocked multiple hack toolkit attacks, tracking cookies, etc. Also what many NIS/NAV uses don't fully appreciate is Norton's SONAR and Insight protection will silently block many Intenet malwares without pop-up notification or log entry.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.