• All Community
    • All Community
    • Forums
    • Ideas
    • Blogs
Advanced

Not what you are looking for? Ask the experts!

Kudos14 Stats

Symantec, Please Explain

I would like to hear from Symantec why they chose to remove the local ID Safe.

In Beta testing Tim_Lopez posted this  -

All,

 

The plan at this point is to have the local vault be removed from the product and have the online vault be the only option. 

 

If you would like to voice your concern about this, please do so in this thread and let us know why you disagree with this decision. We value your feedback so please give us detailed feedback as to why you prefer local vaults if this change is undesired on your part. 

Cheers,
Tim Lopez
Norton Forums Administrator
Symantec Corporation http://community.norton.com/t5/Norton-360-2013-Norton-Internet/What-happened-to-ID-Safe-local-vault/m-p/774634/highlight/true#M2755 We were told that Symantec "valued' our feedback.  It was and is obvious that the majority of people are in favour of keeping the local ID Safe. Please return it permanently in the 2013 and above products,  or at the very least,  please explain why this decision was made. I would also like to hear Symantec's take on the controversial "Share" button and why we can't disable it. Eagerly waiting a reply, Thank you.Dave
A little bit of knowledge is... well a little bit of knowledge.

Replies

Kudos0

Re: Symantec, Please Explain


huwyngr wrote:

I don't know why anyone should be "shocked to find" since there has been enough posted about the change.

If you do an inplace upgrade you keep the local vault at least for now.


I think for the majority of the public that don't peruse forums and such could be quite surprised by such a change and end up here only because of an issue. I didn't know about it until a computer went down and had to install the latest copy of 360 on a different system and was confounded by why I was being required to register IS in such a way.

I think there are also some stronger emotions in trying to fight what you can't see with viruses and such along with issues with a program and changes you don't expect can bring them forth in stronger words than you might normally use.

I can tell you that when I couldn't get around the online vault and contacted customer service and was told that each new feature has an issue it is somewhat frustrating as I have had issue with IS since, I think, version 2. This is actually what came to mind for me when I realized that online was the new direction for IS that continuing complications was the deciding factor.

But what do I know, I 'm just someone trying to keep their systems safe with a program that I try to keep running as smoothly as possible. However if people have to constantly spend hours with customer support (taking over computer and more issues there)  and reading forums and troubleshooting on their own I think after a while people either want to get paid as an employee or feel like they are beating a dead horse so to speak.

It's a shame as I have met a number of good people with good intentions both from the public that contribute here constantly and employees (moderators for the most part) that are here that take the brunt of the online beating. I have even had the pleasure of having a customer service rep. Try and help me here! However when someone basically tells you not to worry about it it will work its self out in the future regardless of past issues ( Even if it were completely true, as I have worked with customers in other fields, I would not make them feel their issue is unjust and it would just be better for them to go away and be happy with that they have) I have to think that if the security of Symantec ever faultered, no matter how many features were added to a program I would no longer wait for the subscriptions to run out.

I am sure there were a number of reasons that were discussed to makes the IS change however I hope that the number of people that are new and remain outway those that will leave.

Kudos0

Re: Symantec, Please Explain


Krusty13 wrote:

Did you read mp3jo's post above the one in the link?


Nope, my bad. I understand now about 'keep NIS" and as it says IS (idsafe) doesn't come with 

NIS that it means to find an alternative for keeping passwords.

Thank you Krusty13.

Kudos0

Re: Symantec, Please Explain

I don't think I disagree with you on this -- there are often features that are added to software (to say nothing of operating systems) that afterwards one wishes had not been .... speaking as  a user of course; not as a programmer.

But when I worked in R&D it was essential not to add features just because one could .....

Hugh
Kudos0

Re: Symantec, Please Explain

bornconfuzd,

Nothing vague about his words that I quoted: they have identified what they believe is the cause 

That's 99% of the battle.

His apology is for not giving us the details of the solution -- which is absolutely standard here with Norton who do not announce in advance what or when something will change. Bitter experience shows only too often that that challenges the fates.

Hugh
Kudos0

Re: Symantec, Please Explain


huwyngr wrote:

mumford,

Nothing vague about his words that I quoted: they have identified what they believe is the cause 

That's 99% of the battle.

His apology is for not giving us the details of the solution -- which is absolutely standard here with Norton who do not announce in advance what or when something will change. Bitter experience shows only too often that that challenges the fates.


Hugh,

Is this the right thread for this post?  Or have I missed something?

A little bit of knowledge is... well a little bit of knowledge.
Kudos0

Re: Symantec, Please Explain


Krusty13 wrote:

huwyngr wrote:

mumford,

Nothing vague about his words that I quoted: they have identified what they believe is the cause 

That's 99% of the battle.

His apology is for not giving us the details of the solution -- which is absolutely standard here with Norton who do not announce in advance what or when something will change. Bitter experience shows only too often that that challenges the fates.


Hugh,

Is this the right thread for this post?  Or have I missed something?


Smething got farkled but I did change the salutation ....

Hugh
Kudos0

Re: Symantec, Please Explain

Symantec,

The whole idea of having all of my passwords local on my computer is to reduce chance of exposure r loss.  Every bank or credit card that has been hacked or lost personal information claimed their site was safe and protected.  If my passwords/vault can't be local I'll find another solution other than Norton to meet my needs.

Kudos0

Re: Symantec, Please Explain

I would like a local vault option as well. Seems this is not a technical issue but a management decision.

I can think of several reasons to support local IS Vaults:

- Current option is local and no desire to go to the cloud

- Can't retain option without upgrade only does not address new installations on replacement hardware

- Single account could have 3 different users, all which do not want to share everything.

- Multiple accounts would seem to 'clutter' things elsewhere... why not sub accounts & better yet local option with onus on user to backup.

- Many users just do not want 'cloud' services for sensitive information.

Kudos0

Re: Symantec, Please Explain

Is this "adjustment" to Norton ID Safe the reason why I am having so trouble using the features of ID Safe?

Is this "adjustment" why when I open the contents of my login info, mostly showing folders with nothing in them?

Is this "adjustment" even when I am logged into ID Safe my usernames and passwords don't function?

What else has Norton decided not to tell me about?

Kudos2 Stats

Re: Symantec, Please Explain

This explanation was worse than not saying anything!

online vault will get hacked, everything online does.

At this point letting my browser store passwords locally seems better than this.

I did not buy Norton for the vault, I happily used them for years without a vault.  Lack of vault will not change my security.

BUT

This is a sign of where their thinking is and how they plan to operate

Another big company who decided they are successful enough and enough of a monopoly to decide what's good for me.

Big companys seldom take such a step and then stop thinking like that.

Stay tuned for more of the same.

This thread is closed from further comment. Please visit the forum to start a new thread.