I complained about the WE.Reputation.1 BS 3 or 4 years ago and now it is happening again. I noticed others are having the same problem - http://community.norton.com/t5/Norton-Internet-Security-Norton/What-is-WS-Reputation-1/td-p/228251/page/10. Who made you guys GOD of the reputation world? This is a clear violation of the law and I am going to talk to my attorney about my legal recourses. I checked the download file - it is not infected with anything but you are deleting it after my customers download it telling them it has a virus. My website is www.mixermuse.com. I make my living on the web. I can't believe that you folks do not have legal culpability for this...Mark
I complained about the WE.Reputation.1 BS 3 or 4 years ago and now it is happening again. I noticed others are having the same problem - http://community.norton.com/t5/Norton-Internet-Security-Norton/What-is-WS-Reputation-1/td-p/228251/page/10. Who made you guys GOD of the reputation world? This is a clear violation of the law and I am going to talk to my attorney about my legal recourses. I checked the download file - it is not infected with anything but you are deleting it after my customers download it telling them it has a virus. My website is www.mixermuse.com. I make my living on the web. I can't believe that you folks do not have legal culpability for this...Mark
Apologies only go so far. The last time this happened I followed your process, reported it and the problem was fixed. Since this is the second time this has happened and I have no idea how many sales you may have cost me - I find this highly disturbing and cannot understand why it is not illegal.
I know Norton probably has legal disclaimers about using their software. However, if software destroys other programs and effects internet commerce adversly (by falsly claiming a product is defective, i.e., virus) and does this on a mass scale, it seems like that is very different than a particular program that may be buggy and crash your computer. Why couldn't a company use this as a legal rationale for destroying its competition or get payed for destroying other companies competition? What law would stop this from occurring? If I go out and 'tinker' with a consumer product on the shelves of a grocery store to intentionally destroy a company or its reputation isn't that illegal?
tw wrote on 6/2/10: > In the event that a file has been wrongly identified as WS.Reputation.1, please submit it here for review.
and
> For a workaround on this issue, please follow the directions in this post.
And in that post there is all the information a developer needs.
md: > I complained about the WE.Reputation.1 BS 3 or 4 years ago ... > The last time this happened I followed your process, > reported it and the problem was fixed.
Has the file/files changed _at all_ in those 3-4 years? Could that be the problem?
I also got a red warning "setup.exe is not commonly downloaded and could harm your computer.". This is after Norton has scanned the file and pronounced it safe.
I remain confused, where you got the WE.Reputation.1 information from. I know you said, "I checked the download file - it is not infected with anything but you are deleting it after my customers download it telling them it has a virus."
I am running NIS 2012 on a Win 7 system using IE9 and below is what I get after I download it: I get the same Insight Safe as shown above, as well as a Microsoft (IE9) warning (Red Shield displaying an X) stating the Publisher of the File could not be verified. I have also shown the Help you get when you select the Learn More link in the warning.
I haev gone as far as ignoring the unverified publisher, and ran the downlaod setup file. Upon permitting run, I got the following, which also shows the file clean.
I then proceeded with the install - to the point asking about a startup entry - I then canceled out.
As I said, I am a bit confused, s I see now problem with the file, downloading the file, nor the start of the install - other than IE not verifying the publisher (the publisger could just bemissing from their list).
Perhaps more info could lead to my seeing Norton accusing your file of containing WE.Reputation.1
I also got a red warning "setup.exe is not commonly downloaded and could harm your computer.". This is after Norton has scanned the file and pronounced it safe.
That is not a Norton notification. It is instead an alert from IE9's SmartScreen Application Reputation feature. Like Norton, Microsoft has also adopted a reputation-based approach to protecting users from downloads that could be dangerous.
Hey, thanks guys for taking an interest in this - I did not expect that!
I tested the file on Vista. I will check it on my Windows 7 machine. My product supports OS' all the way back to Windows 95 so that is is why I used the setup.exe scheme. I use probably one of the most used software installers (more even than Microsoft) Inno Setup because it will work on all those OS'. The output has always been a setup.exe file.
I have two download files. They are identical with the exception of one byte in a configuration file that configures the software for one of two supported products. I just noticed that one of the downloads (call it original) does not get flagged by Norton and the other (call it MKII) does. I pasted the screen below for MKII. I do not think the last time I tried either of these I had the latest explorer on the Vista computer so I did notice with both of these downloads Windows does it flag it as a setup.exe and I have to get through some idiotic screens to actually run it. I will have to figure out how to address this - maybe there is a newer version of Inno that I need to get to repackage it and avoid this Microsoft BS. With regard to Norton - for MKII - these is no way to get around it - it deletes the MKII download. Again - there is one byte difference in both these setup.exe files and it is only a configuration file. By the way a setup.exe can be no more dangerous than the zillion com objects folks are constantly downloading - Windows lets you do this with Explorer’s default security settings.
Of course, I hate Microsoft's monopolizing under the guise of security the computer I own (as all developers and knowledgeable users do). They do this with Microsoft certifications for hardware as I found when I had to get over a hundred modems a quarter through their bureaucracy. I also see this reputation virus as yet another way to keep small business down and favor the big guys. Anyone that tells you there is a ‘free market’ is nuts and should vote accordingly!
