Symantec Accused of Selling ‘Scareware’ in Consumer Fraud Suit in San Jose

I wonder if Symantec would recognize any of those niche market softwares if I tried installing Norton AV or NIS on top of them?

 

There's nothing easy about uninstalling anything Symantec.

 

No, as all of them are supposed to work without issues alongside Norton - with the possible exception of VIPRE AV, but that is a fairly new AV product and they may be already recognizing it now.

 

*bangs head on desk* These are known, reputable companies. Hell, you must think every 3rd party firewall is tiny and unknown. Again though, you keep spinning this thing like a top..it is not about other companies, market share, or anything else but spooking the customer into buying Symantec. That is it, final. Stop twisting it and turning it into something it isn't about. Really, just stop. You're okay with them doing it, fine, we disagree strongly. But don't make it about something it isn't. Alright?

 

I'll grant you that point on MBAM, but OA has a firewall and NIS doesn't want another firewall around and NAV doesn't want another AV onboard either.

 

Not having another AV on board isn't necessarily about competition. It's been well shown that multiple programs like that conflict.

 

Sure is. It's marketing! Illegal marketing actually because it tells users that there's no AV protection on their computer when there is!

Let's be absolutely clear here. It does not say "You are running an AV but ours is better" it says "You are not running an AV. You are not protected."

It's not just "FUD" or whatever, it's a blatant lie. It's illegal.

Again, this is not "You aren't protected as well as you could be!" or "Our product is better, faster, stronger." It is "You aren't protected. You don't have protection installed. You need our product."

Not to mention the incredibly misleading "You have 84 threats!" when they're tracking cookies. Granted, they might be threats. But it's obviously trying to scare the user into believing they're infected.

It also says performance is "poor" and I don't even know what the hell it's going on about.

It is a complete joke of a product and frankly I don't see hwo you can consider it anything other than scareware.

 

You are the one that should stop thinking this is anything more than normal marketing. Keep banging your head all you like, lol, I'll keep telling what I think to be right. And yeah, the examples (MBAM Pro, Online Armor and VIPRE AV) all have very tiny portions of market share. Go research this if you want.

 

Thank you! Lol

 

I can't bang anymore, my head hurts, lol, and you're not helping You're a wall I won't break through, I get it, lol.

 

Again, how can they detect every product out there? And, on a marketing tool? Oh please. Even XP Security Center didn't detect every AV when it was released back in XP SP2. VIPRE AV, the example that brought all this conversation, is a fairly new product. I definitely don't blame Symantec for not detecting VIPRE AV on a marketing tool. It's far from "illegal".

 

Oh I fully understand, dw.
My point is, for those who think/say that Symantec shouldn't be expected to "recognize" VIPRE or OA, I'm saying they would recognize them if you tried installing their software next to them.

 

Yeah, I understand that too. This is a lost cause, so

 

lmao "Every product out there" There's maybe 10 products that hold the vast majority of market share. I'd understand not detecting Sandboxie but ESET Nod32? Are you kidding me?

But no, not even that. They also don't recognize System Restore! A product built into Windows!

Please. There is no excuse here.

 

OA, nop. They can work together. VIPRE, maybe now, but not some months ago definitely not.

 

It literally says that there is no antivirus detection when that is factually incorrect and ESET Nod32 is not some unheard of product. It is very popular.

Saying that they have no restore function when System Restore is on is just a blatant lie and there is absolutely no excuse - you can't say they somehow don't know about system restore.

 

The court case will decide, and sometimes, the court of public opinion will weigh even heavier on a company.

I wouldn't think Symantec is gonna come out of this looking like a knight in shining armor.

 

Oh, and how can they detect every product out there?

Real simple. Check the Action Center. It'll tell you if there's an antivirus installed as well as a Firewall.

 

Was Nod32 the example, or VIPRE AV? The poster was talking about VIPRE AV.

The marketing wants to say that there is something better than System Restore offered by Symantec. Again, exaggeration is normal in marketing. So they will report no backup protection, lol. You may think it's bad, but it's acceptable nonetheless. Just like so many other things in real world.

Yeah, but unlike you, I wouldn't expect elaborated checks on a marketing tool. It will probably only scan for the most popular choices out there (NORTON, AVG, AVAST, MCAFEE, the like)

 

http://www.thewindowsclub.com/trust-norton-pc-checkup-tool

An interesting interpretation of the line "Is system restore activated: No"
And "Last Restore point: None"

It did not say "You have system restore, ours is better." It said "you have no system restore." These are blatant lies and it's honestly just inexcusable.

edit: Now it's time to sleep for me. I don't really see where the argument is. The product blatantly lies over and over again and there's absolutely no justification for it. It is obviously scareware.

 

New facts. Looks like a bug of some sort, if it can detect System Restore but didn't detect.

Did anybody contact Symantec on this? What was the answer? Can this be replicated on the latest version of the tool?

BTW, assuming this is a "scareware" case without more information is both wrong and controversial, even if "you don't see where the argument is". And stating that "there's absolutely no justification for it" is an exercise on ignorance, unless you show more facts to prove your point.

After all, maybe the buggy scareware-like behavior is already fixed in the latest version of the tool. We are talking about something that happened months ago.

 

Another member in the Wilders thread I linked said the tool failed to detect Avira Premium. These are security programs recognized by Windows Security Center.

In all seriousness, read every comment and opinion on that thread, guest. Everyone who proffers an opinion thinks it's scareware, and definitely no one defends Symantec like you are doing.

 

Haha, I'm calling this a buggy scareware-like behavior now.

Waiting for somebody to show an official Symantec answer regarding this issue and replication of this issue on the latest version of the tool.

Another interesting question: is any anti-malware product that supposedly detects "scarewares" flagging this tool as a scareware?

As for your last comment, random people that post on Wilders can be very biased, I wouldn't put too much weight on their opinions everytime. lol

 

I couldn't help but notice the reference to Vipre in preceding posts...

Even an unknown product like Vipre ... can detect when another AV is installed.

The following screenshot was from testing a beta release in July 2010.

 

Haha, and you are of course including yourself in that group, no?
Yes, it is very buggy scareware-like behavior.