03-06-2009 03:00 PM
Why would it log it? Usually when an exploit is discovered, signatures are written as quickly and reliably as possible so that protection is available as quickly as possible. Latter, we go back and refactor those signatures to make them smaller and faster so that machine has as little impact as possible. Because these refactored signatures are highly optimized they tend to be more prone to false positive detections.That's why we first put them out in "test" mode, to make sure that we aren't getting either an extraordinary number of false positives or we are getting false positives on critical applications. If and when the signature has been determined to be good, it'll replace the original signature.
03-06-2009 03:05 PM
03-06-2009 03:09 PM
so the signatures are in test mode and because of this when I go to wwe.com or mywot.com they detect false posotives regaurding java script? Is this happening on everyones computer that has Norton internet security 2009?
Yes, it happen for everyone that hits those pages.
03-06-2009 03:18 PM
03-06-2009 03:29 PM
03-06-2009 04:03 PM - edited 03-06-2009 04:38 PM
The description string is from the product.
"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain." Nobody ever looks in these logs so why should we run a spell checker? Seriously, I've written up an incident report for the misspelling. (Checks spelling of this message before posting.)
Not the first time that Norton products have had misspellings. I noticed one myself once, a long time ago, and I was concerned that my Norton had been hacked or something. I was worried enough about it that I finally contacted Norton tech support and eventually they were able to verify that it was just a typo (I don't remember the specifics of the case or the word that was misspelled; it's been a while).
In my case, I was relieved to find out that it was nothing to worry about, but still, it must surely have cost Norton some money in wages and so forth, to dispell customer concerns about such things. It would have probably been cheaper for Norton (footnote below), in the long run, to just spell things correctly in the first place rather than deal with subsequent tech-support questions wondering about it. Note: I have no desire to interfere with tech-support job-security or anything like that. But it did take time away from other more serious concerns, time that they could have used for helping other customers who actually had malware or bugs or whatever.
Besides the fact that accuracy even in trivial details, makes customers have more confidence in the overall level of product quality control, to not have minor errors/typos built into the product itself.
Accurate app details (even minor things such as spelling, etc.) helps to keep customers from wondering,
"Gee, if they can't even spell normal words correctly, then how do I know they haven't made even more typos in the complicated code/programming itself??"
Needless to say, that thought occurred to me, at the time. Such doubts can all add up, if one is deciding which brand of product to use - all the little details contribute to the customer's impression of the product. (Even though I myself am a terrible proof-reader of my own writing, as evidenced by the numerous typos/edits in many of my posts; maybe one of these years I'll 'go modern' and start to use a spell-checker instead of just trying to eyeball everything.... that would take the challenge out of things though.)
Also, I don't know the first thing about how Norton programs are constructed - people that work there would probably (wildly guessing) tell me something like, "Programmers and the person(s) who made the typos aren't even in the same department" or "Being able to spell normal words and being able to write programs are two entirely different things" or something... but we mere-mortal customers can't be expected to know such things.
(I suppose this sort of detail-oriented thing could all be lumped into a "form vs function" category or whatever, since minor typos in programs could be regarded as merely cosmetic flaws that don't affect the functionality of the product itself, but it's still often perceived as a quality-control issue. At least for customers like me who sometimes actually notice such things.)
Edited to add:
1. I'm not the least bit concerned about how people here on this forum spell things, so no need for anyone to fire up the spell-checker before posting - IMO normal (informal) communication between individuals isn't the same thing as seeing misspellings in commercial products.
Footnote: Theoretically, at least in an ideal world, (huh?? what's that?) if a company can reduce its operating costs without undermining product quality, than (a) it's more justifiable to give employees (the ones that are left, anyway) $$ raises from time to time (or other percs) because there's more money to go around, and (b) there won't have to be as many product price-hikes so customers don't have to pay more for the same product. Happy workers, happy customers (no, I'm not smoking anything, and I'm also usually quite cynical about things in general). Obviously that type of ideal doesn't always apply... I've seen it work good in some small businesses that have good management (i.e., the boss isn't a total <insert expletive of choice>, but big corporations may be a whole 'nother story).
03-06-2009 04:35 PM
Reese is a great guy and has stopped many of my fears on here
I feel the same way, about Reese and the other posters here too. I've learned a lot about security and Windows in general, and had many of my computing-fears vanquished, just from reading stuff on this Norton forum and I appreciate people taking the time to explain technical things and give tips about how to do stuff on our computers. It's quite helpful.