Norman Antivirus advice

I would appreciate a little guidance on Norman as an AV. I am helping my 'silver surfering' neighbours with their new computer setup. The PC came with Norman pre-installed (3mth license) next month this is due to be renewed and I was quite shocked at the re-newal sub for the software.

I have no problems at all with renewal subs whatever they may be when it comes to security but they have asked me about this renewal sub. As this is the only AV they have used they feel happy with the software and can manage it which is something for newbies

I am in a dilemma as to letting them re-new or uninstall to install another AV which would be less costly for them to run. Is the technology Norman uses one of the better ones which would make this a definite re-new for my neighbours? I know other AV's but Norman was only known to me in name, I do not know enough about the efectiveness to advise. Thanks

 

Hello!


I like Norman because they have great program for detection unknown viruses. This is Sandbox. http://sandbox.norman.no/index.html

If you want THE best AV program than choose KAV (www.kaspersky.com).

izi

 

IMHO, Norman is a good antivirus program but not on par with some of the bigger hitters. Over at Virus Bulletin they have received 26 passes and 11 fails but recent results, ignoring Netware etc, show a relatively good detection rate but not the best. Other results have been mixed; http://www.virus.gr/english/fullxml/default.asp?id=67&mnu=67

It is mainly used for Corporate use but it has been the OEM choice for a number of Home computer manufacturers in the UK of late. Stability of the program is good, however, and they are continually improving the program. It should be adequate for your 'silver surfing' neighbours if they visit low-risk sites.

Therefore, you have to balance out the average detection abilities and the 'high' renewal price of Norman against other AV's. If they are concerned about price and adequate/better detection they could consider the following, all of which, IMO, are relatively 'light' footprint AV's;

1. One of the free AV's; AVG and Avast Home come to mind.

2. Of the commercial AV's, ones I have experience of which would offer both better protection, comparable/better price and are easy to setup and use are; ( I am assuming you are UK resident )

a. Dr Web; http://old.antivir.ru/english/commerce/; £15/£11 renewal. The advantage here price wise is that I have never paid VAT with the Dr Web purchase/renewal price over several years. But support may be a problem here!

b. NOD32; http://www.nod32uk.com/purchase/purchase.htm; £23 for initial license. Great support her at Wilders from Blackspear and co.

c. Kaspersky AntiVirus; http://nest-soft.co.uk/shop/; £30 for initial license. Great support from the Kaspersky UK site.

I am not sure about the Norman renewal price, but even with a 30% discount which is the usual procedure, it still seems expensive compared with other AV's.https://einstein.norman.no/scripts/cwisapi.dll?Service=webshop&menulang=uk

IMO, I would trial some other AV's and see which ones they are comfortable with, both in price and ease of use

Overall, if they simply surf a few sites and use email, a free AV should be up to the job.

 

Hi, i'd agree Norman would not be my first choice.
I use and recommend NOD32

 

Thank you so much for all of the replies. I fully appreciate the time spent detailing the various AV's with opinions etc This has certainly given me food for thought. I am in the UK so perfectly correct and know that as this PC and can confirm the business basis or Norman as it is in fact a partner in a business who is contacting them about renewal as this is 'what we use etc'

Shock and horrors the 'advisor' told them not to worry about a firewall when they had Norman AV the advice about the firewall was also from anothe 'advisor' to newbies on a computer. Thankfully they are taking my guidance on security matters now. They are low risk users for sure as they will not do anything without asking me first but that is not to say what a 'friend' may send them etc they are very aware of grandchildren etc

I will list all of these points and will take everything into consideration. The cost factor is not the main issue for them as they are tending to want to stay with Norman as they know it (well for a few months) I think they are worried about uninstalling (this would be my task) I hope he is not as tedious to remove as Norton! I want to be confident I don't upset anything as I do not know what Norman leaves behind.

I know they will take their lead from me which is why I have asked on this forum. The responsibilty is a little scary as I am afraid they will keep thinking they really liked Norman etc I have often considered NOD myself and do read the forum as I feel it is important to keep watching when renewals are due. I will certainly read with a project in mind now.

I really do appreaciate all of this help and I know very definitely my neighbours who are so new and dependent on advice will be very impressed when I show them this post. A lot to learn and take in before the end of March Thank you so much.

 

If cost is not a consideration and they like Norman and it suits their system, stay with it

I have trialed/tested the last few versions of Norman AV and the uninstall is good. I never had any problems removing the AV or the Firewall from the Add/Remove Programs on my systems and both were much better than Norton in this respect Further Norman have specific notes on how to uninstall the AV; http://www.norman.com/Support/Knowledge_bases/Norman_Virus_Control/Windows/installation/11640

If this is their first' AV then this is a natural reaction.

Overall, if they do stay with Norman, maybe you could suggest a free on-demand Anti-Trojan scanner such as Ewido and an occasional check with an on-line AV scanner to act as backups to Norman. Therefore you will have a an effective layered defence for virus/trojan protection.

Then for overall system protection, take a look at these posts;

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=45284&page=1&pp=25
https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=43117
https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=62972

 

That’s what I was going to say. Thanks BC.
If they are comfortable with NVC, just let them keep it. I know for a fact that Norman VC is a good product and they certainly will be well protected by it.


tECHNODROME

 

Thanks again, they thought I was the only one to keep on about a layered approach to secuirty but this post will certainly help to prove my theories against the other advice they are hearing

I have added all the normal Ad-aware/Spybot/Javacool and am going to suggest BOClean as something which will sit in their taskbar which will not require them to do a lot with. One thing I can say after installing the programs I have installed for them they are very good at scanning their computer everyday and even note time taken etc I know this may fade but the more I can keep their guard and the importance of layers when they are at the learning stage they will not forget it.

I will have more fun with the firewall answering as much as I can but feel the great need for them to be confident with the programs and would 'think' when they get used to another AV if they decide not to renew Norman (thanks for the uninstall link) they will feel a lot more confident about changing. I have to admit the Norman GUI is a little dull (not that this is important) but when they see other AV's and know they can work out scanning etc I will feel a lot better and hopefully they will too.

I will have to pay them a visit and explain all of this and then try to make a decision if it is only the fact they do not know another AV or if they really do like Norman.

Thank you once again. I still have to set them up with a router and BB as they are on dialup just now must find a program full of time

 

Is that for a "new" 1 year license, or is that only a renewal? I'd be glad to pay $29 to become a new Dr. Web user and then another $29 to renew it in the future...just don't want to buy a renewal for a license I don't have by mistake

 

The initial purchase and renewal price of Dr Web is unfortunately the same($29) on their main site; http://esd.element5.com/product.htm...69616&random=72c1cda5f09364d3fda0fa93ff9bd330

However, their support admit that the correct renewal price should be with a 30% discount; http://support.drweb.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=469

So eventually, you do end up with the correct renewal price of $20; http://esd.element5.com/product.htm...71722&random=997596c4cffc5283d6aaa51e58ab8897

 

Awesome, thank you! I think I will be giving this a try

 

Keep us posted during your Dr Web trial, particularly if you have any problems.

Carry out a search here on "DrWeb", for some interesting reading.

Good Luck

 

Well, it turns out that a little while ago I had done a Dr. Web trial, and it was showing my trial key as "expired". I emailed support about it, and about 15 minutes later I got a human-written email with a new key attatched. I also submitted two viruses and have gotten confirmation that they will be added to the database already! Very light AV, nice configurability and modularity. Combine that with the great deal you found, and it's a winner I'd say

 

People need to remember that NOD consistently outperforms the competition in the VB trials because it is superb at avoiding false positives. Many times scanners successfully identify all threats but lose out on the coveted medallion by way of overdetection.

 

P.S.
Removal abilities can be nearly as important as detection. Obviously, it is much more lucrative to focus on detection over removal, and in this light, I personally feel that NOD is a slacker when it comes to actually dealing with infestations once detected.

Norman's sandbox technology looks great on paper, but it is much slower than the excellent heuristic technology in McAfee or NOD and with little benefit.

DrWeb is a crummy little program that I can not believe seriously competes with the likes of McAfee, NOD, F-Prot, or KAV. And Avast! is garbage compared to DrWeb.

 

Thank you for your personal views.

Reached I am sure after careful and extensive testing of all of these AV's. Any more gems you can enlighten us with

 

Crummy little program might be subjective, but Avast sports only the most juvenile 'heuristic' technology (if you can call it that; the developers themselves are daunted by the idea of something true).

 

Avast only contains heuristics in its mail scanner. No biggy for me and most other users. Due to its signitures and generic detection - avast for a free product is wonderful, its detection is up there with some of the major players.

 

It’s obvious that you don't know what are you talking about. Mcafee heuristic is nothing like NOD32 or Norman's sandbox.

KAV, avast! and Mcafee use GENERIC detection approach instead of a real heuristic. Which means, they use a single virus definition to detect variants of the same virus family.

How did you come to conclusion about McAfee’s excellent heuristic? What kind of technology are you talking about?


tECHNODROME

 

Well Technodrome,

While it is correct that KAV, McAfee and Avast! use GENERIC detections to catch new virii, it is ALSO correct that both McAfee and KAV do have a heuristic engine...I cannot confirm this for McAfee but KAV has its heuristic code analyser and script checker since v4.x which is more than just generic detections...it examines the file breaking it down into several sub-levels and finds out if there is any suspicious code. Furthermore, you can check www.kaspersky.com for more info on code analyser.

Yes, code analyser names certain new virii as .gen (for eg. IRC-worm.generic) since that is what Kaspersky has defined, but such suspicious samples will not be detected by v3.5 because of the abscence of code analyser.

Regards,
Firecat

 

KAV's code analyzer is a very old technology and I'd say obsolete now. It was a big hit back in late 90's but now with a new kind of malaware, this technology is nothing but a marketing plot.

Today, KAV relays on GENERIC and virus signatures detection.

BTW. How do you know if the file was detected generically or by use of code analyzer?

and...code analyzer is presented in 3.xx versions.


tECHNODROME

 

Um...

Your right Technodrome Code analyser was presented in version 3.5! We can find out whether an infection is generic detection or heuristic detection not all the time, but through this...

If the malware name from KAV says 'Type_<whatever>', then we can be assured that it is heuristic detection...else it will be generic I believe.

Does this mean KAV (and clones) will not be able to adequately protect aginst the newest threats...funny though that most heuristic tests (the ones at www.av-comparatives.org) show KAV to be among the better ones (not the best, but in the higher end of the spectrum anyway) even with its outdated heuristic engine..any idea how or why?

Regards,
Firecat

 

Dr.Web is little program, but I like it.
Bigger program not always mean better.
What you think about that Dr.Web won last Virus Bulletin test, but McAfee failed it.
Btw, Dr.Web failed on previous test (Windows Server 2003), however "Dr.Web for Windows Server" just the beta.
http://beta.drweb.com/?lang=en

 

How droll.
If it looks like a tr*ll & smells like a tr*ll & talks like a tr*ll
Then what do you suppose it is?

Be that as it may, if anyone reading this thread is actually *on-thread* & interested in Norman, then I suggest you have a look at THIS thread. It would seem that Virus X-terminator is a Norman clone at a somewhat lower price than Norman itself.

 

I wanted to say that but I thought I'd be tr*lled...Thanks bellgamin!