ellisonwales wrote:
Therefore i would agree with slinky that because of the redirects amazon.cm is wrongly rated.Malwarebytes website blocking .blocks it by the way.
Thanks ellisonwales!
It's comforting to know that someone has understood my post and isn't taking the moral high ground. As I said previously, my intentions were quite innocent and I merely wanted to test Norton's claims that DNS would correct typo's. Perhaps I was a little naive to expect it to work. Having said that, when buying a new car you wouldn't wait until you're having an accident to try the breaks.., you'd try them out first and that's exactly what I was doing with Norton DNS. How can I be blamed for an error in Norton's DNS manual?!
Yes luckily I did spot the small print during the survey about £1.50 charges per text message or whatever it said but I skipped that page. I have had a string of text messages about texting another (free number) which will entitle me to 5 free lines on the national lottery drawer but I'm not daft enough to respond.
Thanks again for your reply.
Love MalwareBytes, I've been using that too (free version) for a few years. It still finds stuff that NIS misses from time to time.
Cheers Chap.
albertcwang wrote:Hi Slinky_Grafix, All,
My name is Albert Wang and I'm the Program Manager for Norton DNS. We've been reviewing and looking into the feedback on this thread and would like to make a few comments:
1) Norton DNS is not supposed to correct typos. For non-existent (NX) domains, we send the user to the SafeWeb NX Domain landing page. We understand that the KB article might be misleading and have updated it accordingly. Our apologies for any misunderstanding this might have caused.
Well I'm pleased we can agree that the article was misleading, it's a shame though that I've wasted two whole days posting about it! I do have better things to do with my time. I only prey that something more positive comes from my bringing it to your attention. (i didn't win my prize)!
2) In terms of whether this is a phishing website, as Tim has mentioned before this does not technically fall into our definition of a phishing website. However, I've submitted the websites you mentioned to our team to be reviewed and they will be blocked if deemed appropriate.
Well it remains to be seen whether it is a phishing website but my own experience of the survey would suggest that it's not good! As I said previously, I have already had a string of text messages to my mobile asking me to text another number but who can say what that will really cost? It said it was free but I'm not prepared to try it. Also the mere fact that the lucky winner number never changes does suggest that the sites intentions are not honorable.
Regards,
Albert
Hi Albert, good to hear from a Norton Employee, finally!
Apologies for my in-line quotes above I thought it would make easier for anyone left following the thread.
I do appreciate your comments and I am pleased at least that nobody else will make the same mistake as myself, accept of course if they make a genuine typo too!
If my experience here has taught me anything, it is this; Don't put too much faith in any security products and always assume that you're not safe regardless of claims to the contrary.
It does make you realize just how clever these scams can be these days and no matter how much security software you use there's always a loop hole for fraudsters to manipulate. I hope that my post will demonstrate the need to review what is a malicious website and what isn't.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed for now that nothing more will come of it, but it's hard not too worry about the uncertainties!
Thanks again for your reply
Slinky 
Hi Albert, Slinky here....
Yes I quite agree with you on that, what's the point of having security software in the first instance if it can't even detect what appears to be the simplest method of deceit?
I wonder how many hundreds, even thousands of people miss-type a dot com domain on a daily basis? I refer back to my earlier image submission taken directly from Norton's 'Safe Web' site. A user here (LemonMan) has hit the nail right on the head! (See image below)
I actually I think that the original article about DNS which apparently was wrong and miss-leading and which got me into so much bother, in principle was right!! DNS would be a much better tool if it could really detect such a simple mistake!
Thanks again chap.
Slinky
OH.., but wait a minute! Didn't someone say earlier that '.CM' is the extension/domain for Cameroon?
If that's the case, could DNS be made to querey the extension and offer you the choice between the two? In fact, I think that was something else which was supposed to happen anyway according to the wrong DNS doc?!
albertcwang wrote:Hi Slinky_Grafix, All,
... The idea of querying the extension and offering the user choices is an interesting one so we'll add that as an enhancement request for future releases. Thanks!
Regards,
Albert
Hi Albert,
Thanks for the update, it's good to know that Norton have taken the matter to hand and are working on a possible solution for the future. I'm not a programmer but I can't imagine it would be too hard to include a setting/tick box of some sort which would allow the user more control over what domains are surfed. Rather like in Google's Search Engine, you can specify whether your search is within the UK or the rest of the world. So my next question is: Does this mean I can claim 'royalties' for having such a brainwave?? 
Perhaps 12 months free subscription to NIS would do it?!
For anyone else who may be interested, I've just had a peek at Safe Web's updated rating and I see that it was my own user review which tipped the balance from a green tick to an amber one! I'm glad to see my efforts have not been in vein. 
Here's the latest review:
TTFN!
Slinky
- �1995 - 2013 Symantec Corporation Legal Notice License Agreement Privacy Policy Cookies Site Map RSS
