With Clearcloud Demise, which DNS is "ClearCloud Like" in terms of antimalware? (nt)

NO TEXT

 

Norton DNS ...

 

Norton or Comodo I guess.

I'm going to compare their services soon.

 

NortonDNS is backed by a billion dollar company and as so I feel more comfortable that it isn't suddenly going to "disappear" and leave me telling people to change their DNS IP's, again.

But onto the service itself, which I've had no issues with. Fast, effective, gets the job done at no cost to resources.

 

Thanks!
I will give Norton a try (again).
Last time I tried Norton DNS (about 3 months ago) I had weird errors with HULU premium. None of the images would show, they were all killed and replaced with blanks...however it was not constant, sometimes it would work and sometimes not. I was pulling my hair out wondering WTF! Then I tried another PC, same shiat that's when I decided to repoint my router DNS to Clearcloud and woot the problem went away (straight away).

SO let's hope that the norton hulu experience has been fixed.

 

I now use Norton DNS (configured on my Cable/DSL Router).

If you decide to setup and use Norton DNS, be sure to go to the Norton DNS Test Page to make sure that it is setup properly.

http://setup.nortondns.com/

 

I am using norton dns on couple of my systems..its pretty good

 

Neither Norton, nor Comodo is nowhere near ClearCloud in effectiveness. Clearcloud, as I remember most of the links from malc0de/MDL were covered. With Norton/Comodo only a very few. I am now using google DNS (doesn't filter malware sites at all).

 

exactly

 

That was my experience from few months back, too bad that it has not changed. ~ Snipped as per TOS ~

 

This ist not a sign of quality. It would be easy for vendors to automatically blacklist all MDL/malc0de entries, and average user would say "wow".
BUT: MDL/malc0de contains much crap and harmless links/files - so who blocks all has only FPs

 

Yeh agree...

 

DynDNS is also a good option. Norton DNS does not seem to block warez and illegal sites unless if we install the client software and choose the categories manually.

There is no need to setup account with DynDNS if we have to block phishing and malware sites. Change the DNS to 216.146.35.35 and 216.146.36.36

 

Incorrect. Both block malware without creating an account, but Norton is superior at it. Both require creating accounts to block websites in other categories.

Blocking warez or "illegal" sites by default would be stupid. You would be relying on their definition and opinion on what is warez and what is illegal, just to get the malware protection. Malware is always malware, no one will debate that.

By the way NortonDNS uses the DynDNS service. So you get the speed of Dyn and the protection of Norton.

 

Agreed However, how else are you to anti-malware benchmark a DNS server?

If it's easy for vendors then why isn't Norton doing it?

 

You can of course use links form those sites - but the result is only valid if you know that it is real and functionals malware.

Why should they detect everything, even the harmless crap

 

That's true the harmless crap is over the top but Just want to make sure that their team is indeed scavenging the web for stuff or at least paying attention to malware sites.

 

Norton DNS hands down!

 

I meant to say both services block malware by default but DynDNS block warez stuff too. It is dangerous for common users to download stuff from warez sites. Sometimes a search for free software throws up links to warez. If DynDNS blocks any website falsely it can be reported in -http://www.barracudacentral.org/report- and in my experience it is fixed within a day or two.

I tested some links from mdl which were tagged as fake av. Norton DNS blocked only a few while DynDNS blocked many but clearcloud is superior. I think Norton DNS doesn't want to filter sites which may last for a few hours or a day or two. The real time protection of Symantec security solutions will take care of them anyway. Both Norton and Dyn were poor in detecting phishing sites when I tested some links from phishtank. Bitdefender trafficlight firefox extension blocked almost all of them. Even the built in firefox phishing filter performed better. Norton DNS appears to follow safeweb ratings.
Here is a norton safeweb rating that conflicts with user opinion there. As a matter of fact this site is blocked by clearcloud and also by DynDNS without creating any user account.

 

Well, security software can't protect them from not using common sense. If a user decides to click "free.dangerous-downloads.ex" or "free-warez-cracks.ex" (ex - example = .com), then its their fault.