The homepage of my browser was hijacked by trovico.com, however NIS did not discover any problems nor I could find any hits on "trovigo" at the website of Norton. On the internet I found hijacking by trovigo can be a serious issue and finally a found and followed the solution at http://malwaretips.com/blogs/trovigo-virus-removal/ (hoping that the place and suggested software is safe). I expect from NIS a complete protection against internet threats, but it seems now that I need additional software to remove threats like generated by trovico.com. To what extend I can rely on Norton? Why does Norton contain gaps in the protection?
The homepage of my browser was hijacked by trovico.com, however NIS did not discover any problems nor I could find any hits on "trovigo" at the website of Norton. On the internet I found hijacking by trovigo can be a serious issue and finally a found and followed the solution at http://malwaretips.com/blogs/trovigo-virus-removal/ (hoping that the place and suggested software is safe). I expect from NIS a complete protection against internet threats, but it seems now that I need additional software to remove threats like generated by trovico.com. To what extend I can rely on Norton? Why does Norton contain gaps in the protection?
Welcome,
Norton is an antivirus program that also catches other threats. It cannot catch all of them. In fact no single security program can protect you 100% of the time from 100% of the thousands of threats being released daily. Malwarebytes free scanner and SuperAntiSypware's free scanner are two that are often recommended here as second opinion scanners.
Please use only the free versions, the full [pro] versions have active scanners which will conflict with your Norton program.
In my opinion I think that Norton's programs provide the best available protection against viruses and other threats which can damage or destroy your data and programs. The other mentioned scanners are a great compliment to your Norton program. With a fully engaged chair / keyboard interface you will have as good protection as is available anywhere on the web.
Welcome to the Norton forum. Sorry to hear about your problems with the Trovico browser redirector.
Further to dickevans' comments, there is an article here on the Lifehacker website titled The Difference Between Antivirus and Anti-Malware (and Which to Use) that also concludes that users should use an on-demand (manual) scanner like the free Malwarebytes Anti-Malware to scan for lower risk lower-risk PUPs (potentially unwanted programs) and PUMs (potentially unwanted modifications) like adware and browser redirectors that sometimes slip past your antivirus real-time protection. The reason I like this article is because Lifehacker asked representatives from Avast (a free antivirus program), Norton, McAfee (paid antivirus programs) and Malwarebytes (a free anti-malware program) to explain what types of malware their software should detect.
There is a companion article here on the Lifehacker site describing the different classes of malware.
------------ MS Windows 32-bit Vista Home Premium SP2 * Firefox 27.0.1* IE 9.0 * NIS 2013 v. 20.4.0.40 * MBAM PRO 1.75.0.1300 HP Pavilion dv6835ca, Intel Core2Duo CPU T5550 @ 1.83 GHz, 3.0 GB RAM, NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS
Thanks for your response, dickevans and imacri. I understand the difference between the various threats, however, from a package named (Norton) Internet Security I expect more than virus protection alone. One of the reasons for choosing an Internet Security package is that I don't need a bunch of different programs to keep my computer environment safe. If the position of Norton is that for the detection of some types of malware I have to rely on additional programs (and have to find them myself) the reason for using NIS would be lost for me. I that case I will compose a bundle of free protection software myself, saving me the fee for using Norton.
If you go to Settings | Computer | Real Time Protection | Antispyware | Configure you will see the broad categories of threats (Spyware, Adware, Remote Access, etc.) that NIS can detect in addition to viruses. For a full list of the specific threats, go to Norton's Threat Explorer site here and click on a category. Under Spyware, for example, you will find links for descriptions of several keyloggers such as Spyware.UltimateKeylog, Spyware.SuperKeylogger, etc. that Norton can detect.
There are many users in the forum who don't feel that using an antivirus program like NIS, Avast, McAfee, etc. in combination with a second opinion on-demand scanner like the free Malwarebytes Anti-Malware or SUPERAntiSpyware scanners as the Lifehacker articlehere recommends provides adequate protection - particularly against lower-risk PUPs like the browser redirector you were infected with. There was a recent thread here in the forum, for example, discussing whether NIS users need to install specialized keylogger detection from companies like Zemana or SpyShelter (I'll leave it to you to read the full thread and make up your own mind, but just FYI, NIS was able to detect and remove the simulation keylogger Zemana provides for testing). The need for additional protection depends entirely on each user's browsing/downloading habits and level of comfort.
------------ MS Windows 32-bit Vista Home Premium SP2 * Firefox 27.0.1* IE 9.0 * NIS 2013 v. 20.4.0.40 * MBAM PRO 1.75.0.1300 HP Pavilion dv6835ca, Intel Core2Duo CPU T5550 @ 1.83 GHz, 3.0 GB RAM, NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS
Thanks for your response, dickevans and imacri. I understand the difference between the various threats, however, from a package named (Norton) Internet Security I expect more than virus protection alone. One of the reasons for choosing an Internet Security package is that I don't need a bunch of different programs to keep my computer environment safe. If the position of Norton is that for the detection of some types of malware I have to rely on additional programs (and have to find them myself) the reason for using NIS would be lost for me. I that case I will compose a bundle of free protection software myself, saving me the fee for using Norton.
to the forum.
As Imacri mentioned, a dual-layer PC protection plan can be helpful. I'm using MBAM ("Malwarebytes") alongside Norton 360 AV.
The general consensus about the topic is that typical residential PC users are better protected when implementing a malware-specific (ie, "PUP"s as Imacri mentioned) protection tool in conjunction with your mainline AV product.
This approach isn't limited to Norton's AV products. In other words, mainline AV products can't guarantee 100% protection statistics. There's just too many malicious variants out there that are being launched into cyberworld on a daily basis to be detected and contained 100% of the time.
All that being said ,I'm probably in the minority view in how I look at AV protection products. I rely on them to block the vast majority of threats but just as important to me, I rely on the AV product to notify me of a potential issue as well as chcking my CPU usage, System Tray icons, current Process running, etc.
The important part to me is being aware of the presence of an intrusion. If I know about such an intrusion, I'll use my backup plans as a means of recovery.
Well, opinions differ whether NIS should 'cover all' or not. For me, the added value of 'payed protection' is that the product is complete and saves me from searching all kind of addiotions ('ontzorgen' as we call it in The Netherlands; I don't know how to translate this in English, but it is something like 'taking over total care from the customer'). If somebody can invent and develop apps like MalwareBytes and SuperantiSpyware, than Norton can do so too and add it to the NIS-suite. If somebody can develop a keylogger app, than Norton can do so too and add it to the NIS-suite. Etc. If NIS can't offer me 'total care', then I will do it myself, compose a 'suite' of free protection software and terminate my NIS-subscription.
If you go to Settings | Computer | Real Time Protection | Antispyware | Configure you will see the broad categories of threats (Spyware, Adware, Remote Access, etc.) that NIS can detect in addition to viruses. For a full list of the specific threats, go to Norton's Threat Explorer site here and click on a category. Under Spyware, for example, you will find links for descriptions of several keyloggers such as Spyware.UltimateKeylog, Spyware.SuperKeylogger, etc. that Norton can detect.
I have all concerning settings "on", nevertheless, NIS does not detect Trovico.
Well, opinions differ whether NIS should 'cover all' or not. For me, the added value of 'payed protection' is that the product is complete and saves me from searching all kind of addiotions ('ontzorgen' as we call it in The Netherlands; I don't know how to translate this in English, but it is something like 'taking over total care from the customer'). If somebody can invent and develop apps like MalwareBytes and SuperantiSpyware, than Norton can do so too and add it to the NIS-suite. If somebody can develop a keylogger app, than Norton can do so too and add it to the NIS-suite. Etc. If NIS can't offer me 'total care', then I will do it myself, compose a 'suite' of free protection software and terminate my NIS-subscription.
What I want to add is that I understand that 100% safety can never be guaranteed, however I am not talking about 100% safety but about 'total care' to save time in managing my protection.
What I want to add is that I understand that 100% safety can never be guaranteed, however I am not talking about 100% safety but about 'total care' to save time in managing my protection.
Hi HoogendoornJH:
I certainly agree with you on that point. One obvious drawback of using a second opinion on-demand scanner like Malwarebytes Anti-Malware (MBAM) is that any malware/PUP that evades your antivirus real-time protection still manages to infect your computer and it's up to the user to find the best tool (whether it's MBAM or some other anti-malware tool) to fix the problem.
Norton users with infected systems have the option to pay an additional fee for the NortonLive spyware and virus removal service (which I personally think should be included in the price of my annual subscription) or to register with one of the free malware removal forums listed here in delphinium's post.
There have been several posts in the Product Suggestions board requesting that Symantec do a better job of detecting lower-risk malware like PUPs (see Quads' post here for one example, and leave a kudo if you agree with his comments) so I hope that the Symantec employees monitoring that board are taking those suggestions into consideration for their next product upgrade.
------------ MS Windows 32-bit Vista Home Premium SP2 * Firefox 27.0.1* IE 9.0 * NIS 2013 v. 20.4.0.40 * MBAM PRO 1.75.0.1300 HP Pavilion dv6835ca, Intel Core2Duo CPU T5550 @ 1.83 GHz, 3.0 GB RAM, NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS
I'm not sure what "total care" means, if it doesn't refer to 100% safety. Security software is only one component of computer security, and it is arguably not even the most important or effective component, regardless of how many features it offers. Really, the solution to the issue of unwanted software is simply to pay attention to all screens that are presented during the installation of new or updated software, especially free programs. Preselecting the option to install bundled software or to change program settings is such a common practice these days, that users ought to expect it and to look for the boxes that need to be unchecked before continuing an installation. SInce the bundled software is not malicious, but simply unwanted, the decision to opt in or opt out is really up to the user, not the security software they are running. After all, the MSN homepage and Bing search engine are both offered in this way when one installs or updates Skype. Not everyone wants these, but many people do. I really don't foresee Norton blocking these two Microsoft offerings, so where would you draw the line?
“Well, opinions differ whether NIS should ‘cover all’ or not. For me, the added value of ‘payed protection’ is that the product is complete and saves me from searching all kind of addiotions (‘ontzorgen’ as we call it in The Netherlands; I don’t know how to translate this in English, but it is something like ‘taking over total care from the customer’). If somebody can invent and develop apps like MalwareBytes and SuperantiSpyware, than Norton can do so too and add it to the NIS-suite. If somebody can develop a keylogger app, than Norton can do so too and add it to the NIS-suite.” And you want to pay how much???
I'm not sure what "total care" means, if it doesn't refer to 100% safety.
It’s all about risks. You can do everything you know to reduce risks (“total care”), but nevertheless not reach 100% safety.
Cyber criminals are always one step ahead of protection software, so in principle protection software can never guarantee 100% safety. Protection software developers cannot write software for things they don’t know, nor can virus databases contain virus definitions for unknown viruses (although heuristic scanning attempts to cover this). “Total care” means that a protection software developer includes everything in its suite to combat threats regarding data traffic from and to a device (whether it is via internet or via an USB-port or whatever). However, as stated before, not everything is known, so the protection suite cannot guarantee 100% safety by definition, despite the fact the software developer did everything what was within its knowledge and capability to protect you.
Where to draw the line? That is more or less where what is known ends.
There have been several posts in the Product Suggestions board requesting that Symantec do a better job of detecting lower-risk malware like PUPs (see Quads' post here for one example, and leave a kudo if you agree with his comments) so I hope that the Symantec employees monitoring that board are taking those suggestions into consideration for their next product upgrade.
Yes, they should really think about the concept of "total care".
Presently, when it comes to Potentially Unwanted Programs, the onus is on the end user to carefully read the End User License Agreement when installing, especially free, software.
Presently, when it comes to Potentially Unwanted Programs, the onus is on the end user to carefully read the End User License Agreement when installing, especially free, software.
Yes, you mentioned this before. I searched the Norton License Agreement (NLA, hoping this is the same as EULA) for the word "free", but did not get a relevant hit. Can you please be more specific in what you mean?
When you install third party programs you will need to agree to their EULA. If you read carefully that EULA you might find that you will be agreeing to install a bundle included with the program that you want. In that bundle are often PUPs which most of us do not want, and some of which can be a real pain to remove. You will more likely see these PUPs when you install free software.
All that said, since you agreed to install that program and it's bundle, you then find yourself afflicted with PUPs.
If you have agreed to installing said PUPs, you can't really blame Norton for allowing it, can you?
,I'm probably in the minority view in how I look at AV protection products. I rely on them to block the vast majority of threats but just as important to me, I rely on the AV product to notify me of a potential issue as well as chcking my CPU usage, System Tray icons, current Process running, etc.