I have readf Norton had some issue with AV Comparitives testing procedures becuase it reflected badly on Norton products even thoug it didn't effect other security products. Does anyone know the truth here? Some people have went away simply because they don't see Norton rated at all leading them to belive they score so low as not to be listed.
does Symantec still whitelist the Magic Lantern Trojan key logger The FBI has put out?
Hello
I don't see the program being listed in the list of malware that is blocked according to the current list in NIS 2014.
I have readf Norton had some issue with AV Comparitives testing procedures becuase it reflected badly on Norton products even thoug it didn't effect other security products. Does anyone know the truth here? Some people have went away simply because they don't see Norton rated at all leading them to belive they score so low as not to be listed.
does Symantec still whitelist the Magic Lantern Trojan key logger The FBI has put out?
Hi, Britton30. Norton Guru DaveH explains it thus
Magic lantern was designed to only activate when PGP was being used to steal the private encryption key.
It has also been covered before in your previous post.
Britton30 wrote:
I have readf Norton had some issue with AV Comparitives testing procedures becuase it reflected badly on Norton products even thoug it didn't effect other security products. Does anyone know the truth here? Some people have went away simply because they don't see Norton rated at all leading them to belive they score so low as not to be listed.
[...]
Symantec's non-participation in the AV-Comparatives testing is currently being discussed in this thread:
All Norton Community members are invited to participate in that discussion. If you would like to share your views on this topic, then please do so now. According to the AV-Comparatives website, software vendors need to apply to join the tests by the 10th of January 2014.
thanks everyone. None of the explanations do anything to bolster my confidnece in Norton. Symantec voluntarily pulled out of the test becuse of the poor false positive test. If other products can pass it with no issues why can't Norton. It can't be explained away with "it's not a valid test" if 15-20 other suites have no issues with it.
As to Magic Lantern I was are it works by using PGP but it is still malware by definition and should be detected. Norton has no way of knowing if the FBI published it, if they placed it, or if it has been modified by a malicious hacker.
Britton30 wrote:thanks everyone. None of the explanations do anything to bolster my confidnece in Norton. Symantec voluntarily pulled out of the test becuse of the poor false positive test. If other products can pass it with no issues why can't Norton. It can't be explained away with "it's not a valid test" if 15-20 other suites have no issues with it.
As to Magic Lantern I was are it works by using PGP but it is still malware by definition and should be detected. Norton has no way of knowing if the FBI published it, if they placed it, or if it has been modified by a malicious hacker.
A/V suites are moving away from signature based detections and using behaviour based detections as the primary method. So unless you have tested your system against this malware, you cannot say Norton does not protect against it.
As to the testing programs, as Norton did not participate, again we do not know that the Norton products would not have done as well or better than the competitions. Norton gave their reasons for not participating, and you can add your voice to try to get them to join in next year.
Norton said they whitelisted Magic Lantern, not me. It was reported they bowed to government request. I was wondering why they would not want their customers protected against any malware regardless of the supposed origin or purpose. The other companies have done so. It seems all the answers are skirting the issue I have raised in the original post.
I read thier reasons for not participating in a test, it give them a low score with false positives. Maybe a Symantec employee would care to reveal all the true info with no hype and smokescreens. 
Hi, Britton30. That post from DaveH, was not his wording. The info came from this Wikipedia page.
You can draw your own conclusions.
Hi F4E, The Wiki is one source that brought me to ask the question. The Wiki page has been edited in the last 4 days, it did include a reference to Symantec's cooperation with the Feds. However I foud this post in David Icke's blog/forum which has the Wiki quoted.