Slashdot Mirror
Symantec Adds Product Activation
maliabu writes "GlobeTechnology/CNET reports that Symantec has added an antipiracy technology to the new version of its main virus-zapping program, in the form of compulsory product activation. It is intended to protect consumers from widespread counterfeit copies of Symantec programs. The company estimates at least 3.6 million bogus copies of its programs are sold annually, causing headaches both for Symantec and unsuspecting buyers, who find out too late that the software isn't doing the job."
It is intended to protect consumers from widespread counterfeit copies of Symantec programs.
I don't believe it as a main cause.
Trolling using another account since 2005.
I'm sure THAT will work. Good job nobody knows how to turn that kind of thing off eh?
Hmmm.
How would product activation protect users? Piracy prevention only protects symantec.
The Television Wiki
Dumping MS is no longer a question of ideology. It is now a business necessity, given the way MS software is wide open to attack. if this adds to the cost base of MS then that is good because it will mean more people choose different and more secure options.
Seems like the new standard - now they can enforce virus definition subscriptions as well - previously, reinstalling the product after a clean deinstall + registry clean would reset the subscription date for definition updates.
So the real question is - if there are 3.6M bogus copies sold, and (by RIAA numbers) an additional 360M pirated freely online, by enforcing the product activation, will the Internet see more viruses or less? (and yes, I know it's technically virii)
My vote is on more...
Subscribe for free to my show!
Symantec antivirus for home use is bloated as hell and has required yearly "subscriptions" for some time now. When that nonsense started, I bailed. Antivirus software should at the very least offer free updates to the virus definition files, given the havoc that these things have been causing of late.
Curb CO2 emissions: Kill yourself today!
A properly configured windows box is just as secure as linux, tell that to the folks at gnu.org that were trojaned since march.
I am very disappointed with Symantec/Norton anyway, in recent weeks I have replaced 20 desktop licences with AVG by GRISoft. AVG found viruses on about 15 systems where Norton did not complain at all. Yes, Norton was up to date in all situations and many of the desktops were installed by other people, so no commonality there.
If I had shares in Symantec I'd be selling them now.
A) The crackz will appear in few days.
B) Other antivirus comapnies will try and cash in on by advertising their products as "no activation needed". It happened to turbotax.
while NO anti-piracy strategy is foolproof (we can only talk about rates of piracy, not absolute values), the fact of the matter is that product-activation can be done without sending the user's SSN and first-born through the lines.
Actually, I'm just pissed off that some asshole russians wrote "crack" programs (still widely available on all those cracks sites) to break the security of a previous version of some shareware i wrote (cost of shareware: $20 and for a very specialized audience). So, in a later version of my software, I included a type of product activation and wrote a code in such a way that the compiled stuff would be harder to figure out. 2.5 yeas later - still no crack out fot the software that I can find anywhere, plus I am secure in the knowledge that my reg codes are doing a lot less walking.
Fair is fair.
And like most methods of protection, I wouldn't be surprised if Symantec's product activiation was cracked pretty quickly indeed. I suspect Symantec would be better off spending the money they spend on developing/buying this technology adding to the fund they use to pursue and close down the spammers who try and sell pirated copies of Norton AV, System Works et al.
If you're going to inconvenience your legit users in order to reduce illegal copying, just tell it like it is. Protecting the consumer against illegal copying would just require signing the software, no mandatory activation.
... they tell honestly that they want people to actually pay for the program? Norton AntiVirus is worth every buck you pay for it, and the online update features are very comfortable. I can't imagine of "bogus" copy's that don't work, and even if they existed, why counteract with a registration. if the bogus copy doesn't work, they don't have to fear it. Furthermore Symantec does a great deal in helping us for FREE (do you remember the W32.Blaster removal tool you could download even when you weren't a costumer of them?), so i think if you want to use AntiVirus from Norton you should pay for it, if you are greedy there are a lot of free alternatives
".Sig Stealer" was here
I agree with "Say no to Symantec" but what you should pick up if you're stuck using Windows is AVG Anti-Virus ... you just can't beat the price!
--- I'll have a Bloody Mary, a Steak Sandwich and a uh Steak Sandwich.
Just like the copy of my Symantec Anti Virus software I got for free with my DELL.
...Visit the website... Oh your version of Anti Virus has expired, please consider upgrading or buying our one year service plan...
Installed, and what pops up... Oh your virus files are out of date! Please visit our website.
The notebook was BRAND NEW...
This is called a money grab, boys and girls...
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
What, the heck, is this fairy-tale all about?!
Cracks will be aviable in matters of hours in the same manner as in case of windows. Thus, if the real purpose should be copy protection, this is waste of money for R&D
Not suprised, whenever I've bought or installed their software it has never used a serial number.
- make the update protocol encrypted and secured;
- make virus pattern update sucription for money;
- release the client software itself for free;
- ???
- Profit!
Why? I hate product activation - it never works and users are always frustrated.Besides, the scanning and curing are not complicated operations per se. Virus patterns are the content that I am ready to pay money. Therefore the the other business model: charging for content rather than for software.
Less is more !
How can I install GNU/Linux as my Windows XP's virus shield?
seeing that most people in the open source community is free of virus attacks, is there such thing as an open source anti-virus software?
if so, will it defeat the purpose as virus writers can just look into the codes behind and get around it?
I personally don't mind product activation as long as consumers are aware of it before buying. I mean it is a matter of choice. I am sure you can find alternatives without product activation if you like. So it is simple. If you want to buy Symantec (Symantec is not a monopoly like MS so you do have many alternatives), then you will have to activate the product. I mean why do people talk as if trying to prevent piracy is a very bad thing. Only requirement is that the consumer should be informed, and after that let the consumer decide. I know some will argue that if Symantec is successful, others will incorporate same technology in their products as wel, but the point is that if Symantec succeeds, that means that a majority of consumers don't mind activating anyway. So in that case other would be fully justified in adding this technology to their own products. On the other hand, if people are bothered by it, they simply won't buy it. So just let the invisible hand of market take its course. I am sure we will reach an outcome which is benificial to the maximum number of people.
What's under yellowstone?
So now that they've solved that whole pesky "pirated software" issue they'll finally lower the price, right?
If only the RIAA could implement product activation on CD's... then everybody would be happy.
The only anti-piracy technology that really works is that which uses hardware.
It's difficult if not impossible to duplicate a hardware lock (parallel port dongle), and it costs money to do.
It would cost Symantec about $5 in mass production to include a dongle with their anti-virus software. It would cost the average person $25 to make that same lock, and would be difficult if not impossible to duplicate the firmware...
Software methods for anti-piracy were killed by copyiipc back in the 80's....
The thing is, in newer versions they do not include "innoculation". Innoculation used to simply take a fingerprint (CRC32) of your executables/libraries, and could be set up to refuse to run unknown, or, more importantly, changed executables. This is great because even if you're behind in virus signature updates, your virusscanner will still detect new and unknown virusses as long as they don't compromise the virusscanner engine itself; such virusses (as well as engine updates) are far and wide between, unlike signature updates.
Recent version do NOT check binaries' integrity using any sort of fingerprinting, be it crc32, md5, sha1 or whatever, thus forcing you to rely on the yearly subscription of virus signature updates. That's not because innoculation was broken or even not user-friendly enough (it was off by default), that's was a pure 100% unadulterated marketing decision!
Interestingly, the free-for-personal use personal firewall product I'm using DOES use checksums to check whether binaries that may have specific permissions (to access the internet or open ports) have changed!
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
The company estimates at least 3.6 million bogus copies of its programs are sold annually, causing headaches both for Symantec and unsuspecting buyers, who find out too late that the software isn't doing the job.
Well, when the customer tries to register the (bogus) product he probably bought it already. So it's too late as well, isn't it?
continuing to use the old versions of norton as long as they are 'useful'... will symantec put older versions aside (not support them) for the sake of the new activation mechanism? i guess not...
because if you have every used a Symantec product like Norton Internet Security (NIS) or Norton Antivirus (NAV) you must have realized how easy those have been to install on multiple computers.
:)
:)).
I've bought one back home and run it on all of my (2) home Windowsses, after all Norton is almost a synonym for quality when it comes to Windows utilities. I've also installed few from some public www page, where NIS 2003 (includes NAV 2003) was spread in 40MB fully working package.
Maybe they are just playing it wisely, waiting for the fuzz about M$ fascistic moves calmed down and then switching their own system on.. Can't blame them, this is IMHO the only way to go, no other realistic options.. However, I doubt that this will give them much more money, as hopefully most of the commericial side is already using their products legally so this would mostly target home and lifeless w4r3z d00ds
Though I have to admit that I haven't read any recent statistics about pirated stuff used at workplaces, only heard news that it'd be going down all the time (at least here in Finland or Scandinavia.. I have very bad memory
-rzei
...is their PRICING. When our school went to purchase a new license for Exchange it cost as much as the Exchange server license plus Windows 2003 license plus 200 CALs. And that's ACADEMIC pricing. Unbelievable.
They think they're God because they are a gold partner with Microsoft. Well, basically, I told them what they could do with themselves and went with Sophos instead who offered much more (an entire SITE license) for only half that price.
In light of this new info (concerning product activation), I'm that much gladder we didn't go with them this time around. Too bad, I rather liked Norton on Exchange 2000. But, there comes a time when you realize that paying more for the anti-virus software than for what the anti-virus software is running on simply doesn't make sense.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
If Symantec were to recover a decent percentage of the currently pirated copies, this would generate more revenue to cover overhead and profit growth.
There then is an argument that this could lower the price that Symantec needs to (and does) charge the legitimate users.
I'm a big Linux enthusiast, but also fully support closed source and charging if that's what software companies need to do to make money. Without this, they wouldn't be in business so it's naturally their right.
Hunger is the best sauce.
Another possibility would be to use Panda Software Antivirus (free -as in beer- edition).
Trolling using another account since 2005.
Slashed and Dotted.
503 Sig Unavailable
The Signature could not be accessed. Please try again later or contact the administrator
Open-source anti virus software.
Er, freeware anyone? Try avast for example - it's free for home (desktop) use, and has free definition updates as long as ye register.
I personally can't see what extra features would make me fork out on a costly alternative, that i can only install on one machine due to product activation, even though i have more that one pc at home...
Get it here. It's free for non-commercial use, even if the interface is a bit baroque. But so is Norton's.
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
I've always thought it's a bit strange that a piece of software that has to phone home to work well (i.e. download signature files) was so incredibly easy to copy. I installed Norton Antivirus on my parents' old computer, and when they bought a new one I thought I'd have to go through some more or less complicated procedure to get the program to run on it. But nope, I installed it and not only did it work, I got 12 new months of free updates (only one year is included, then it's like $10 per year).
Martin
causing headaches both for Symantec and unsuspecting buyers, who find out too late that the software isn't doing the job
Yes, let's protect buyers from the genuine Symantec versions; the fake ones simply have to be working better--they couldn't work any worse.
- Get spare box, install Linux or BSD (OpenBSD, I would suggest)
- Setup firewall, block anything that is not on ports you allow (both inbound and outbound)
- Setup NAT so that your Windows boxes can use it as a gateway
- Setup mail server
- Add filters to mailserver that attachments with extentions
.vbs .com .exe .bat .pif .lnk .src (and I surely miss some out) are removed
- Let all your mail (inbound and outbound) go over that mailsever
- Setup DNS and block any free email system that you can think of (hotmail.com, yahoo.*), so that your little sister won't acces her hotmail account and infect your system
Remark: if you cannot let this Linux machine connected 24/7, you might want to use fetchmail for POP3 retrieval, which allows filtering too IIRC.Protected this way, you're already safe from most viruses and worms like MSBlaster won't get through to your vulnerable Windows machines. ;-)
Of course, I surely have forgotten some things in that list...
But if you get though all this trouble, why not just install Linux/*BSD on that machine or sell your Windows machine (preferably infected, so the dolt who buys it has the problem) and buy a Mac?
If Symantec, M$, et al really care about consumers, then they should change when consumer's credit cards are charged for buying the product. If the box and CD are useless until product activation, then consumers should not have to pay until they have successfully run the activation procedure.
I have nothing against antipiracy/product activation per se. But I do object to schemes that force people to pay up front and then jump through a series of hoops that have a non-zero probability of failure. Until a company delivers value, it should not expect consumers to deliver payment.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Clam Antivirus is probably what you're looking for. Its viral signatures come from a database maintained by the OpenAntivirus project. Note that Clam aims at protecting Mail Servers by filtering mails content rather than protecting Desktops.
Well, that would do my LAN and a couple of friends.
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
Activation is nothing new. In 1998-1999 (I forgot exactly when) we had to install 3dStudio Max on several lab computer and had to activate it each time despite the fact the program required an additional hardware dongle. Activation is, simply, the most hellish pain in the ass that you can inflict on any consumer. I don't believe there are many severe privacy concerns, but the functional concerns (say a virus that changes a bit or two in nortons product key so it becomes deactivated) are many.
There is nothing wrong with being gay. It's getting caught where the trouble lies.
I, for one, am happy with Symantec's decision and hope that many much more Windows software companies do the same. The more obnoxious they get the more likely people are to go and look for alternatives that actually allows them to do their job instead of going in their way.
This trend looks like the proprietary software industry trying to shoot itself in the foot to me, and I welcome them to try.
"The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers." Bill Gates,
4. Unleash new and more potent viruses at regular intervals;
Finally, the plan is complete..!
Now let's see. I have bought my new computer and want to connect to the internet. But I am not going to do THAT until I've got some anti-virus software runnning. So I go out and buy a copy of NAV, which I then install. But it won't run until I connect to the internet to activate it. And I won't do THAT until I have some anti-virus software runnning. So I go out and buy a copy of NAV, which....
I've also noticed that after a recent "Live Update" and reboot of my machine that one of the Symantec executables (ccApp.exe I think) insists on contacting crl.verisign.com when it didn't before...
Personally, I am getting tired of all this extra effort just to use a damn piece of software I purchased legally. I'm also tired of every single application wanting to contact the mothership for some reason.
-Phil
Shoot questions, first ask later...
If the world switched to GNU/Linux how long would it take before the first state of the art viruses for GNU/Linux would be out? How long would it take if everybody started using Solaris 9? How long for Atheos? How long for OpenVMS? How long if we all ditched our PCs / workstations and got ourselves zSystem mainframes running zOS? ... Incidentally, the first virus program that received some publicity ran on IBM compatible mainframes under MVS.
Of course last week when the SoBig/Blaster fiasco was in full bloom my subscription expired and I figured it was worth $15 to not have to reformat/reinstall.
Also, I've had no complaints with NAV - the times I've tried to use McAfee I've gotten fucked. And then every job I've had uses McAfee. Hmmmmm...
Schnapple
I love running my copied NAV. Although it was an hassle to uninstall and fetch a new version every year because of the subsciption expiration, I still like it.
So what am I gonna do next year? Buying it is not an option. I'll be a poor student by then.
-0-0- idle
"the user loses because they paid for a counterfeit"
These copies are "counterfeit" in the sense that they aren't legitimate copies from Symantec, but they do in fact allow you to update your virus definition.
All the warez versions out there aren't legitimate in the sense that they don't have a valid license, but all of them let you update the virus definitions.
So this doesn't protect consumers; it only protects Symantec. This isn't a knock on Symantec, but lets not give them kudos for something that only helps them, *NOT* consumers.
It is possible that some technical users might be more comfortable taking the plunge with Linux/BSD than having to buy a Symantec license. Im not condoning piracy, far from from it, but the reality is that most home Windows/Office/Outlook/Antivirus users out there today do, or at least have in the past, used a pirate copy of (insert product name here).
In fact, there is evidence that the big players even tolerate a bit of this kind of thing because they recognise that to penetrate this "lower end" of the market, "free" is the way to go. (The subtext here is the recognition that today's Business Studies student with a bent copy of Office is tomorrow's Managing Director of Ford. - IBM failed to recognise this with OS/2 - and said future MD will go gut/comfort-zone when buying IT systems: guess where the comfort zone will be at).
I am therefore hoping that some of these users on a tight budget will find themselves squeezed by a pricey antivirus solution to a (mostly) windows-only problem and see Linux as a viable alternative due to its price (nil), security (better IMHO) and the number of pathogens out there (minimal).
I wish at was Friday, but I dont want to wish my life away. So I wish it was last Friday.
We bought Symantec licenses for our Windows workstations last year, and despite keeping everything up to date, several PCs got infected (silly people clicking on attachments, mainly). We switched to Grisoft's AVG. Free, simple, and very good.
This move by Symantec is an attempt to bolster revenue, and it will fail. They should (a) improve the quality of their product and (b) provide a free version for home users. If they do not do both of these, they will simply drop into obscurity, and this copy-protection move will speed-up their demise.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
I downloaded Norton Anti-Virus for years, and its always been free. Of course, it wasn't from Symantec, but that's a technicality.
His attitude.
Dell has supreme and absolute control over what software they allow to be bundled with their computers. If I sell rat poison and Tropicana decides to mix it with their orange juice guess who will go to jail.
Software that I have "pirated" is software I never would have purchased anyway. I pirated it to use it for my personal amusement or education. Adding product activation just means that I won't do that - so what does it gain the company that initiates the activation strategy? Nuttin honey.
Just look to Quicken for a recent example of this. Their sales actually went down because of all the problems that activation caused the end user.
I personally PURCHASED Taxcut because it specifically DIDN'T have activation. Also, I gave my CD to my father-in-law, who tried it - liked it - and bought his own copy.
I assert that the net gain for these companies will be Zero or Negative. People like to be trusted, and for the most part they can. The other cases can be chalked up to free advertisement.
Is the juice worth the sqeeze?
that's was a pure 100% unadulterated marketing decision!
Their marketing department stopped making decisions based on adultery - what is this world coming to? I always fancied a romp in the sack with my married coworker before deciding on any marketing decision.
From excellent karma to terible karma with a single +5 funny post...
"Actually, I'm just pissed off that some asshole russians wrote "crack" programs (still widely available on all those cracks sites) to break the security of a previous version of some shareware i wrote"
I'm sure it sucked anyway.
And the reason the later version wasn't cracked is nobody cared enough to crack it. Look, everybody can use Norton Anti-Virus. But hardly anybody uses your stuff, and so its not worth it to crack it.
[i]causing headaches both for Symantec and unsuspecting buyers[/i]
Damn!!! my $5 copy of Norton Antivirus 2008 isn't legit.
Wow! Who'da thunk.
You missed the point of product activation. It's a sure bet that 99.9% of the pirated copies being sold are bit-for-bit identical to the original. Ergo, any MD5 sums would match anyway, convincing the poor sap who purchased the pirated version that he/she was okay. Software doesn't have to be modified to be pirated.
By contrast, product activation seeks to ensure that users register their copy with the manufacturer, and that only one copy is in use at any time. This (sort of) effectively prevents selling duplicates of a CD, and (if properly managed) prevents selling duplicates of a registration number too.
--Brandon / Split Infinity Music
What about computers sold by i.e DELL that is bundled with this? I remember that XP Pro didn't require me to activate it. Could I possibly have a pirated version of XP? (I know I don't) I wonder if pre-bundled software will require activation as well. Also, what about corporate editions? Will IT have the headache of activating each computers client app or will it still work the way it does now where the server just pushes the app onto the client?
The subscription that everyone is talking about is a subscription to the "live update" service whereby the latest virus definitions may be downloaded and installed automatically.
Symantec make the virus definition updates freely available for you to download EVEN IF YOUR LIVE UPDATE SUBSCRIPTION HAS LAPSED. - Just yse teh "manual" definitions and teh "intelligent updater" - it's a bt more tedious because you have to remember to go to the site, download the updates and install them by hand - but it CAN be done for FREE.
And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour Isaiah 3:5
Correct me if I'm wrong, but a virus definition is some kind of signature of a piece of code... But isn't that 'signature' the sole proprety of the creator of the virus? And therefor, wouldn't it be a violation of copyright law to use this signature without the consent of the creator of the virus...
:-)
:-)
SCO should write worms and sue to people who ran it on their machines, then they could sue the virus software compagnie for including part of their code in their virus definition!
I'm suprizes that they didn't think of that before
I did not "miss" this effect of product activation, I just see it as what it is: A way for Symantec to deny service to users of illegitimate copies. A user of a pirated copy is worse off with activation than without: He has already paid for the software and can't use it. If the copy is identical to the official product, there's nothing from which the user has to be protected, unless you think that someone who unknowingly bought a believable counterfeit is in legal trouble.
When done right, product activation can avoid privacy concerns, but it still isn't good for the user. It's a pure antipiracy measure. Them bullshitting the users about the intentions of product activation does not create confidence in the scheme privacy-wise.
It stores license information on the PC's hard drive and allows for up to five activations for the same product key
My question is, what happens if you go over 5, you have to rebuy?
I have 3 computers, and I usually just buy one copy of Norton Internet Security, so that means i can only use it 2 more times, or do i have to buy 3 copies which it is usually $70 for one.
Hmmm, if it's intended to protect consumers... I wonder if they'll let me register a legit copy from two different home computers?
(I'm guessing NO!)
Imagine if every bit of software on your computer was tied to that one computer. All of your games, all of your utilities, your office software, etc. Everything.
Now imagine thinking about buying a new computer. You have all of that money invested in software which is tied to old computer. Suddenly, the cost of that new computer is a LOT more because you have to buy your software all over again.
Of course, defenders of product activation will say that you'll be able to remove the software from the old system and install it on the new system. But do we know that for certain?! It certainly didn't work that way for TurboTax users.
Essentially, switching will become a risk. You might be able to use some of your software, but some you will not. Plus, that old computer will have absolutely no software on it, thus, it'll be rendered useless.
Some will argue that installing software on two computers you own is illegal. They'd be right, BUT, and this is a big BUT, CONSUMERS ARE USED TO IT. They've been doing it that way from the very beginning. When consumers get used to doing something one way, they get pissed when it changes.
When product activation is widespread, Dell, Gateway, and every other computer manufacturer can kiss their asses goodbye.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
Q. Who really loses out with product activation?
A. The companies that include them in their products.
Explanation: Private people who know where to find cracks for products will do so regardless of whether there is PA or not. WinXP, OfficeXP, etc, and pretty soon NAV as well have or will be cracked. Businesses in poorer countries especially, will revolt against PA, not only because at least some of the products they were using were cracks, but because they often installed one product on all the computers in the company in order to save money. With PA and the threat of BSA audits hanging over their heads, they will be enticed to switch to either other non PA software or OSS.
Simple isn't it?
I had one of my users have their laptop stolen. It had MS Office XP on it. I still have the disk. MicroCrap said that I should of gave the disk to the theif, cuz they are worth crap now. So I had to buy another copie of it. I think they should do something for this sorta problem.
Our office of 50 people just removed McAfee from all computers and installed Virus Buster (Japanese edition) by Trend Micro (antivirus.com). Check it out, you might find it is useful.
Nothing is free, especially subscription services ... by definition!
Unequivocably so. They offer a time limited trial version, so there is absolutely no excuse, none, for not using a morally, ethically, spiritually, physically, positively, absolutely, undeniably and reliably legit version.
Sure, they're lying about the reason, it's about money. Sure, it's possibly a futile, perhaps even a counter productive gesture; if you have to stop using a hooky Symantec product, you might end up giving money to one of their competitors. But that doesn't alter the basic rightness of their position.
Frankly, I'm surprised there's even a story here. I call -1 flamebait on this story.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
If you are a home user you are a fool to pay for your windows Anti-virus....
AntiVir
get it for free for home/non-profit use and call it done.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Here's my question -- isn't this sort of "requirement" by a major anti-virus software firm a little dangerous these days, what with rampant worms and viruses tormenting IT departments and dragging down the Internet?
To me, AV software should be, perhaps, the most lenient in terms of licensing these days. While I know it's a violation of the license agreement for a consumer to do so, what is the REAL harm in someone putting a copy of AV software on 2-3 computers at home or in a small office if, in the long run, it helps to prevent the sort of global infections that we saw last week?
Certainly, Symantec has a right to protect its intellectual property and its revenues. On the other hand, is it setting itself up to be the scapegoat if, say, several hundred or thousand users don't get the latest AV software because they don't want to deal with product activation OR they end up only buying it and being able to install it on a single machine out of 2-3 they might have in their home?
When I say scapegoat, I mean in terms backlash if another big (SoBig) virus comes out and trashes computers globally. Someone could easily rant "Symantec made it impossible for me to put AV software on my computer!"
I have really been thinking hard about product activation coming into the AV software arena, and now it's come to pass.
It would appear that few here have bothered to go look at Symantec's web site to see what they have to say about activation. Some of the things people have complained about, based solely on reading the Slashdot blurb, have no basis.
Interesting points are:
As a commercial software developer myself, I can understand why Symantec is doing this, though I too am amused at the "for your protection" approach that is so common. I also see activation is becoming more common (PowerQuest's new DriveImage 7 has it too), especially in products that people tend to buy once and install on multiple systems.
If formal and informal piracy wasn't so pandemic, such things would not be necessary. But it seems so many people believe that it's their RIGHT to steal software (or music), if they don't feel like paying for it. I know this is heresy for Slashdot, but there it is....
I use another free antivirus program called Antivir, which you can find at www.free-av.com (don't want to slashdot them by providing an easy click link).
I ditched Norton when I installed NAV2002 and found that it really slowed my system down. Antivir is made by a German company and is free for personal use. It's very efficient, the whole program plus definitions is the same size as Norton's definitions file!!
The original poster's comment is quite valid though, and illustrates a glaring oversight of the open source community. All those who regularly dismiss Windows as being insecure etc, must realise that there are lots of people (gamers mostly I'd wager) that cannot move from Windows without affecting their computer usage in a significant way.
An open source antivirus program could be made, much like OpenOffice.org, to be cross platform, with a single universal definitions file that could be easily shared amongst any OS you could name and still provide the same functionality. Because of its open source nature, it would be constantly able to be checked for exploits etc, and the wider community would have no excuse not to use it since it would be free forever.
All of you using Linux must also remember that whilst poorly run Windows boxen are the main spreaders of viruses, they impact the wider internet, and thereby become OS neutral problems regardless of where they began.
I for one really hope that a team of programmers step up to the plate and make an open source Windows antivirus program, free of bloat, that runs efficiently in the background without bogging down the system. You could even distribute the updates via P2P, adding to the legitimate functions of P2P.
Quizo69
Visceral Psyche Films
...work well and are worth the money is pcAnywhere and Ghost. The antivirus stuff stinks. It's bloated and slow. Updates come out too infrequently. In Q3/4 or 2003 all antivirus products should have at minimum daily scheduled updates, maybe even twice or four times a day. Then on top of that, the "emergency" updates.
I run a network of about 500 desktops and 30 servers, mostly Windows stuff. Recently I had to re-evaluate antivirus vendors due to my old one becoming too crappy and expensive at the same time. Norton's enterprise suite was one that I evaluated. We set up a test lab with 10 brand new Dell Dimension 2350 desktop PC's loaded from the factory with standard installs of W2K Pro and one brand new PowerEdge server running W2K Server . The trialware version of Norton on each desktop machine was uninstalled. We installed the Norton enterprise stuff onto the server and then attempted to do a "push" install to the workstations. This process seemed to run ok, and reported no errors, but the client-side stuff never would start up after the install, as if it didn't install at all. There were folders full of Norton stuff appeared, but it would not start or run. No error messages were given and nothing appeared in the event logs either. It just simply didn't work. Norton support expected me to sit down and debug their software for them. Since this was an evaluation of their product I told them they flunked. This "evaluation" spoke volumes about what I perceived to expect from the quality of their software should I choose to go with their product. I didn't. I then tried Trend's corporate product on these very same machines and the install process was stone simple. Plopped the cdrom in the drive, ran setup and clicked thru the defaults and it all installed and just simply worked correctly the first time. The client "push" install was so simple and straightforward that we were amazed. It even uninstalled the failed Norton stuff automatically for us. That blew us away. The Trend suite cost about $1500 more for 500 user licenses, but it's been well worth that just in installation labor savings alone. I have the central server set to check for updates every hour too and that's very nice. We haven't had a single virus get thru to harm our network since, in the past few months we installed Trend. I highly recommend their product.
It's a sure bet that 99.9% of the pirated copies being sold are bit-for-bit identical to the original.
If that's the case, then those users wouldn't be having problems.
AVG Antivirus is pretty good, got automatic updates and it's free for personal use.
I suspect at one point it was possible to do this but Symantec caught on. Unless you're currently doing it - care to share the secret?
Schnapple
I installed an older variant of Norton Antivirus on one of my wife's relatives' computer, and since I haven't seen them for a while (more than 12 months obviously!) the program still requested that they renew their subscription.
The interesting point here is that even though they were using a pirated copy of NAV, they ended up paying Symantec anyway for another twelve month subscription, since they aren't very net savvy.
I imagine that quite a few people fall under this way of operation, meaning that Symantec makes money even from pirated copies in some instances.
Of course, now I use a free program called AntiVir which does the job equally well, and I get to feel all warm and fuzzy inside that I'm not pirating anything.
What really got me changing was when Symantec announced that whilst older version of NAV (pre-2001 I think) would be able to be kept up to date forever due to the licence they had at the time, the new version they'd released came with only a 12 month subscription (after shelling out over AUD$100 for the program in the annual upgrade cycle they seem to get you into!).
So their greed has now cost them myself as a subscriber, plus all my relatives/friends who I now set up with free alternatives.
Visceral Psyche Films
"the company estimates at least 3.6 million bogus copies of its programs are sold annually, causing headaches both for Symantec and unsuspecting buyers, who find out too late that the software isn't doing the job."
:)
All kidding aside, a good anti-virus app is worth every penny. I have no problem paying good money for an app. that will do the job and Norton sure as heck does. But I guess not a lot of people feel the same way, a quick Kazaa check landed me over 80 users to download from.... WOW, if only those Metallica songs I want had so many users... *pokes jab at RIAA.
Sold... I thought that is what Kazaa is for
http://www.grisoft.com/us/us_dwnl_free.php
bad sig...no donut.
Last time I talked to Symantec Tech Support about this, the support representative said that Norton SystemWorks was the most pirated software in the world. He sounded proud. He said that all copies that are "CD only" are pirated, as are lots of the others. He said that the price should never be less than $60. (SystemWorks includes Norton AntiVirus.)
Even some of my distributors, very legitimate companies, offer a pirated SystemWorks, apparently unknowingly.
Allowing piracy until now seems to be a deliberate marketing policy of Symantec. The idea seems to be that people invest time in learning how a product works. Those who discover they have pirated copies may not want to invest time again. They may then buy a legitimate copy.
If allowing piracy is not a deliberate marketing policy of Symantec, does that mean that no one at Symantec is smart enough to use Froogle? It's not as though finding the illegal copies is an expensive task.
Microsoft seems to have used this as a way of destroying competitors to DOS back in the old days, and with Microsoft Office more recently. There was a time when ALL local distributors were selling pirated copies of DOS (often unknowingly). I don't know if it is happening now, but at one time everyone who bought a computer from local builders was offered a "completely legal OEM copy" of Microsoft Office for $50. I called Microsoft and was told that all such copies were pirated.
Apparently, Microsoft's policy of allowing piracy was a way of killing competitors. Instead of Microsoft Office for $400 and Corel Word Perfect for $50, it was Microsoft Office for beaucoup moolah and Microsoft Office for cheap. It was impossible for Corel to establish Corel WordPerfect as a reasonable alternative. All second-tier products were crushed by the piracy of the most popular products.
Here's a question: Doesn't allowing piracy as a marketing tool invalidate the copyright?
When companies allow piracy, that makes it difficult for legitimate companies like ours. Our price doesn't seem competitive. Piracy as a marketing tool makes it seem like we are over-charging customers. It damages our reputation, and often prospective customers don't even give us a chance to explain.
Legal notice: I'm stating here my long-standing opinion only. I'm not saying I know anyone is a pirate, or a piracy encourager, only that they appear to me to be.
NAV 2003 turned out to be a dog. It took 4 installs & activations before it worked properly on my Win 98 box.
A month later, I replaced my Win 98 box with a P4 box with Win XP. I installed & activated NAV 2003, which failed. I uninstalled and reinstalled it, then tried to activate it. I was informed (by Symantec's web site) that I had exceeded the maximum number of installs and was politely asked to purchase another license.
Three phone calls to Symantec tech support were useless. They repeatedly told me that this was Symantec's policy and absolutely refused to give me more installs FOR THE PROGRAM I BOUGHT FROM THEM. (Not from a store, but from Symantec's Web site itself!)
I just bought MacAfee's product earlier this week. To hell with Symantec and all of their crap.
Be afraid...be very, very afraid!
You're using her as bait, Master!
Here you are, with an opportunity to promote your magical mystery program, and you don't.
I call bullshit.
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
Here in Japan, bought a new copy of Norton AntiVirus 2003 for Yen5600 and installed on NEC Valuestar NX PC with 266MHz CPU and 60GB disk. Norton AntiVirus scan for 24hours, then it stops and waits stupidly in night for any answer to Do LiveUpdate Yes/No? 6hours later, runs out of memory and crashes.
Repeat from start. Then when started Internet Explorer in parallel, Norton AntiVirus crashed. Start again!! 32hours later, AntiVirus runs out of memory and crashes. Ctrl-Alt-Del no good. Reboot. Repeat. Same result.
Uninstall. Ask shop for refund. Answer, no way politely!
Im protected because if I buy a counterfeit product, take it home and install it, it won't work. Seems like quite the consumer protection scheme to me. Are consumers expected to rinse and repeat until they stumble upon the real deal?
OK, so let'e see. Intuit comes up with an
activation/protection scheme is that
draconion and destructive, they lose
thousands of customers permanently (myself
included), get months of bad PR for their
efforts and end up helping their competitors.
Symantec, I guess you're ready to throw
your business away?
1 in 19 Copies. That is how many people pay for Norton Anti-Virus. Now let's assume that over the course of a year a person may have to FFR their system 3 times. That still means that for somewhere around 80% of the copies that are out there Symantec hasn't seen a dime for. Even for the Subscription service, after all why pay $15 for a years worth of definitions when you can just get a pirated copy of the new version. Or just buy one copy and install it on 20 machines. Happens all the time.
Let's face it. More and more companies are going to start doing things like this.
I've been a paying user of Norton Anti-Virus and Norton Utilities, and eventually Norton SystemWorks, for every edition since 1997. However, I refuse to use any product that requires activation. As such, I recently purchased NOD32 to replace the Norton Anti-Virus part of SystemWorks, but I have not been able to find anything that comes close to being equal with Norton Utilities for Windows. I thought I'd try installing just Norton Utilities from Norton SystemWorks 2003, but it's borked. Apparently it requires all of SystemWorks to function properly.
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars." - Oscar Wilde
Anyone here reminded of The Terrible Secret of Space?
"We are the product activators."
"We are here to protect you."
"We are here to protect you from the terrible counterfeit copies."
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
I was wondering how older virus software works? Assuming I've got an older version of NAV that still supports virus definition updates ... will that version continue to receive the latest and greatest virus definitions? If so, what's my incentive to upgrade? Do the newer virus scanners scan things differently? If not, I'd rather stick with a virus scanner released prior to the annual versions that expire in the year.
Software in general has an unnecessary high price because of the widespread freeloading.
No, software in general has an unnecessarily high price because of a certain favourite monopoly. An 86% profit ratio means piracy isn't affecting their bottom line at all.
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
http://www.f-prot.com
There's versions for Windows, BSD, and Linux. Hell, there's even a free version for DOS which can even be used on XP with a little know how. F-prot's been around for a _LONG_ time and while the DOS version doesn't have a real time scanner feature, I've been using AVG for this which is also free anyway. IMO F-prot's the best, I see no reason to use bloated norton or others when there's something as cool as f-prot.
God forbid they should make it so people need to buy their product. Welcome to capitalism.
Who doesn't like free music?
Anyone that REQUIRES me to activate ( or register ) something I had to fork out money for, wont get my business.
1 - they don't need any information from me. Its none of their business.
2 - I don't want to be at their mercy.. tomorrow they may decide to un-register me.. or not allow me to reinstall on my pc after a HD crash..
Its mine, I want the control. Or no sale.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
My favorite quote from the article:
Mr. Smith said more than 250,000 customers completed the product activation process with trial versions of Symantec products this year, with negligible customer complaints.
What a business plan - consider all customer complaints "neglible." I guess they missed the Intuit fiasco last year.
I have often put the "OEM" NAV 2002 on computers I set up. It give the user three months protection after which the user is required to subscribe to Symanatec for virus updates. $20 bucks a year. I don't like the new scheme, nor understand why they worry about bootleg copies. They get their revenue from subscriptions. They should give the software away. The only explanation is they are chasing the last penny in a saturated market. I will have to look for an alternative. Personally, I won't support activation schemes for anything. I hope the market spanks them.
>>It's a sure bet that 99.9% of the pirated copies being sold
... including the likelihood that it really isn't protecting their PC," Mr. Smith said.
>>are bit-for-bit identical to the original.
>If that's the case, then those users wouldn't be having problems.
Well, I'd like to see some statistics here about "problems". If you read the GlobeTechnology article, it has exactly two quotes about this:
1) "The company estimates at least 3.6-million bogus copies of its programs are sold annually, causing headaches both for Symantec and unsuspecting buyers, who find out too late that the software isn't doing the job."
2)"What consumers don't understand is that while those units may appear to be legitimate, there are a number of risks associated with pirated software
What does "doing the job" mean?
It appears to me, based on background knowledge of the basics of antivirus software (namely, that the definitions must be kept updated to make the software useful) and the rather limited quotes above, that not enough detail is given in this story to assume that any users are having problems with the delivered pirated product. I would bet that most consumers install it, and it runs just fine and does exactly what Symantec advertises - right up until they try to update the definitions or purchase an upgrade.
The real headache for any big software company is not raw sales. Those happen just because it's good software. But the money goes out in tech support. I firmly believe that the real problem Symantec is trying to handle here is to reduce their tech support costs, dealing with unsuspecting dupes who bought pirated copies, and are furious that they cannot get it to update as they expected.
This argument looks suspiciously like a SMOKE SCREEN for Symantec, trying to make the USER'S problems sound worse than reality. Now, I agree that piracy is a real problem. Hey, I write and sell my own software, and I have the same questions and concerns. But the chances that some pirates out there are mangling copies of NAV and selling versions which don't work are pretty small, when it's far easier to sell a mere duplicate copy.
So as I see it, the entire issue about "protecting the consumer" here is NOT about protecting them from broken software, but rather protecting their ability to keep that software up to date. And it naturally has the side benefit for Symantect that more users will actually PAY for the software.
--Brandon / Split Infinity Music
For home and non-commercial users, just switch to AVG Antivirus. See Grisoft (the publisher) for the free download. It is free and it has free updates. Again, only home and non-commerical users can use it for free.
GF.
Lots of petrified grits
As we've seen this past month, viruses/worms pose major threats to everyone, apparently even those who don't download 20KB .exe files thanks to XP's "features." So when you have a hundred thousand people with pirated copies of XP and anti-virus ware, and the companies decide to block service to the stolen copies, they are turning their back on a chance to secure a larger percentage of malignantly infected computers spewing their payloads to as many random IPs they can generate. And while the paying customer may be secured from remote vulnerabilities to the virus, they are not secured from floods of all flavors of packets.
I can understand my CoolEdit software deleting itself if it finds out I pirated it as in doing so, it does not leave others at risk. But people who legitly run anti-virus software tend to have paid for it out of FUD, or passively possess it from it having been included with their PC (I'm talking about non-savvy Joe GUI), and the Kazaa'ers out there pirating this kind of software must be a pretty miniscule percentage of their customer base.
Basically what I'm saying is they're probably not going to save much money from a move like this, and their doing is comes at the expense of the safety of all users (pirates and honest people alike). It's their right, but it makes me a sad panda.
My Norton Antivirus 2002 that came with my Compaq Presario expired recently. I was not in a position to renew the LiveUpdate contract at the moment. Every day, NAV would pop up a box "Your subscription is expired" with a "remind me in X days" box... and the box has only one option: one day. So every day it reminds me. I e-mailed Norton to ask how to turn off the reminder, or at least have it only do it once a week or so. Their answer? Impossible. The only thing you can do is either renew or uninstall. Sure, keeping current on virus definitions is important, but if I'm willing to take a chance, it should be my right to do so without being pestered daily, don't you think? They spin it as "protecting you" but it comes across as a combination of CYA (as in their "A") and marketing bordering on spam.
Then remove all directories named "Symantec" or "Norton" from your hard disk, especially the ones under C:\Windows\Application Data and C:\Windows\All Users\Application Data (Win 9x), or C:\Documents and Setting\*\Application Data (Win XP).
Then simply re-install your Norton product and you now have 1 year of nag-free virus protection. To be fair (and legal) to Symantec, however, you should turn off your automatic virus updates once you've brought them up-to-date.
Coincidentally, this is the same method Symantec advises to cure many, many otherwise unfixable bugs with their products.
when everyone gives everything, then everyone everything will get
Microsoft was the first major software maker to broadly use product activation, introducing it in the Windows XP operating system and it obviously did not stop the pirates... ...and speaking of antivirus, you got an much better option for FREE. Just check www.grisoft.com
There are more than enough dirt cheap semi-legit OEM copies around that you can buy with a $2 network card that noone really needs to deal in pirated versions. The OEM copies of Virusscan and Norton sell for between $7-15. How does Norton make their money off it...simple when a person renews their anti-virus they still have to pay $9.95 a year for more patches, a cost most people happily pay.
That it could be a real pain for me when installing the software after an upgrade and new HD. Also when dealing with multiple machines behind my LAN, but then I think you're supposed to get a license for each anyhow.
One thing I've always found amusing with Norton Registration is that when you install a product, it would set the expiry from the date of install. A nuke-then-reinstall gives you a license to updates for another full year... so I bet this will help solve that issue too.
Aside from the obvious annoying in reinstall with such measures, registration really isn't a huge problem. With Norton, you need to be online for the software to be effective anyhow (updates), so online registration is just a few pieces of info and then everything is good (so long as the given information is used appropriately).
Bloody hell, so this means I have to buy Norton Systemworks for all 3 of my machines? I would hope that one copy is enough.... Sheesh. Oh well, they have to protect their business in some way. I'll just have to use linux on all my machines so systemworks isn't needed.
So far we've seen people mention Grisoft's AVG (which I use at home), Avast, and even F-prot for DOS - but I haven't seen anyone mention this yet
Housecall - online virus scanner-- got someone who thinks they have a virus? Just send em to this site, while it doesn't prevent viruses, it will tell you if any show up! Its good in a pinch, and if you think your current virus scanner might be missing something.
...unfortunately no one can be told what The Mat^H^H^HGoatse is...they must experience it for themselves...
Ah, I should have RTFA. 5 activations for each license. That's not too bad. I wonder if you can delete an activation from the symantec database, if for example, your computer blows up (Actually did happen to me). This product activation thingy isn't too bad.
not feed the obvious troll...
This is exactly what I was thinking. Every John Doe has a copy of NAV, and the same goes for Adobe Photoshop.
:)
I don't think that Photoshop could have become the market leader if it wasn't easy to copy. But Photoshop is also going the way of product activation.
The more interesting question is, where will all the people flee too when they can't use their favorite product anymore? How many people jumped on Linux when XP started product activation? How many people will go over to The Gimp, leaving Adobe behind?
I think this will greatly increase the need for an Open Source anti-virus scanner. Which is probably a good thing.
Here's the info while trying to access
http://www.grisoft.com/us/us_dwnl_free.php
--
Norton Internet Security 2002 has blocked access to this restricted site
Site: http://www.grisoft.com/us/us_dwnl_free.php
Blocked categories: Sex/Acts
If you think this Web site is incorrectly categorized, visit the Symantec Internet Security Center to report it.
PS. How come it takes slashdot so long for my password to be sent to me after registration? As a result, I have to post this as Anonymous Coward.
For many folks, it seems that:
(probability of getting virus * cost of getting virus) < (cost of running virus software)
and my personal experience has shown this to be true, as long as the user stays reasonably abreast of prevailing viruses, avoids risky behavior, and doesn't use risky software (like outlook).
Now, with product activation (which is, alone, worse than most viruses, if you ask me), the right hand side of the equation just went up significantly..
who's moderating the meta-moderators?
There are some MAJOR issues with this suggestion. Most notably, the Longhorn Operating System is DRM enabled. This means that the OS/hardware is designed to block programmers from making a wide variety of direct calls to the hardware. Supposedly, this is intended to make is much more difficult to copy "Content", however, it also makes it much more difficult to write a small/efficient AV engine.
Microsoft will probably bundle an AV engine with Longhorn (supposedly, this is the main reason for Microsoft's GeCAD acquisition). It might be possible to develop an Open Source content distribution system to produce definition files for the engine, however, Microsoft might very well decide to block the interface to the engine. It will be interesting to see what happens.
I'm posting this anonymously because I happen to work for the company that provides all the e-commerce.
Basically all of the downloads will be trial versions, which will need to contact the authentication servers with an Activation Code. Once this is done, the product is then activated successfully. They have a certain setting for how many times it can be activated before you have to call.
The company is called Xtream Lok, or at least the product is. Supposedly wrappers and encypts the whole product...supposedly secure..but it just hasn't been broken yet.
Symantec estimates for every legal copy there are 10 non legal copies. This will make people actually buy it...and it really isn't that big of a hassle, not anywhere near as bad as TurboTax.
Product Activation, as with ANY form of anti-piracy mechanism, only makes life more difficult for the legitimate end-user. The crackers will find ways around it, and then all the pirates will have modified copies that don't bother to check. Trying to fight software piracy by technical means is doomed to failure, because thousands of high-school kids with ENORMOUS amounts of free time and energy will always be ahead of even a really good team of specialists working a job.
The only way to "combat" piracy, is to lower the prices of the products to the level the public is actually willing to pay. If the price were more acceptable to the public, more people would buy it just to avoid the hassle of having to setup the hacked copy, and having to find new ones every so often as they get killed by updates or blocked by the update servers.
Consider, a non-upgrade version of M$-Windows XP Pro costs something like $400? Very few people will fork over that much cash, yet they still try to sell it in retail stores. If the price were $100, I suspect the sales figues would go up much more than 4x, which would mean more profit, and a reduced need for pirated copies.
Oh well, like the RIAA, some folks don't really get it. $400 for an OS, or $16 for a CD, it's still overpriced, and it still won't sell.
This is Symantec's business model:
1) Create viruses
2) Create code to clean the virus
3) Release the virus
4) Profit!
Don't be surprised if majority of worms and viruses are actually the work of the companies creating virus scanners and cleaners......
I'm using some one elses internet to view this site.I can't get phone service and have no internet. I can not use activation based software and still do not use WinXP and others that use it. I've been looking into Linux now because this stuff is pushing me out of Windows altogether and if it continues out of all commercial software completely. I wish Symantec the best but I can't use it. I never had any luck w/ McAfee so maybe I'll try Panda? I don't know. I'm not a geek but I had to say something.
Previously, the company said it was a "trial program". Now that the "trial" is over, activation will be appearing on all of Symantec's consumer software. That includes Norton Antivirus, Norton Personal Firewall, GoBack Deluxe, Norton SystemWorks, Norton Ghost, PCanywhere, and WinFax Pro.
I also used to me a McAfee and Norton antivirus user and recently switched to Trend. Trend being a Japanese product is a lot like buying the "Honda" of antivirus products and McAfee and Norton are like Ford and Chevy. 'Nuff said.
Symantec has added an antipiracy technology
/rant
Antipiracy??? "Los piratas atacan naves!!" (RMS last Saturday in a local free software conference, in Uruguay)
Pirates attack ships!
Non authorized copying of software is not comparable to attacking ships.
It does not make any sense comparing unauthorized copying with theft, pillage and rape.
The best way to fight the most important threats to our freedom is to start realizing that IP is not an inalienable right, such as life of freedom, and threatening IP is not comparable to threatening life, or freedom.
just skip the registration process, genius
> just skip the registration process, genius
That is incorrect. When you install NAV 2003, you have 14 days of use and updates before you are required to register. Sure, you can decide to not register, but then you can't download the latest virus profiles. What's the point of paying for antivirus software that can't protect you from the latest viruses?
Considering that there a few free anti virus packages for windoze users out there, there is no need to pay street gang like 'protection money' for anti-virus software.
That's only true if the average user knew enough about Symantec to know that their product typically requires activation, and I doubt that's the case. You could make an argument that the manual would mention it, but 1) nobody reads them and 2) that would be pirated as well, so pirates would just change it in the process (assuming they bothered including it).
This is trying to protect users that try to buy a legitimate product and find out that they have an illegal copy instead. This is IMHO a Good Thing if implemented correctly.
Usually I'd disagree, as it requires an internet connection, which one may for whatever reason not have available when installing. In this case, though, antivirus is generally most necessary for the internet anyway, so I'm cool with it.
As long as they keep their grubby hands off my boot sector, and as long as I can change hardware without it stopping working, I'm OK with it.
I do question whether it will work, however, as I mentioned.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
I don't mean to sound dense, really - but I don't understand how you can create an open-source virus scanner. Wouldn't virus authors also have access to the source code?
we see things not as as they are, but as we are.
-- anais nin
I can recommend an excellent antivirus solution - AVP (AntiVirus Protection), a prize-winning and blah-blah-blah. It is a policy of the company that protecting the public from viruses is more important than maximizing their own profits, which is why they intentionally allow pirated copies of their program to download regular updates. Think which company would you rather trust the well-being of your PCs - Symantec that is willing to implement a potentially risky product activation or Kaspersky Lab? Don't forget, any product activation system may crash eventually, just like MS systems did, and you will not be able to enable your antivirus for hours or even days. It would be really helpful for writers of the NextBigVirus to DDoS Symantec product activation servers, not Windows Update...
BTW, the creators (Kaspersky Lab.) also maintain a great online virus encyclopedia.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
When product activation is widespread, Dell, Gateway, and every other computer manufacturer can kiss their asses goodbye.
:)
Or they might just say "fuck you" to the software industry and switch to hardware without accessible ID numbers. How could you tie your software to the computer when all computers look the same?
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
Intuit learned their lesson by putting product activation in their 2002 version of Turbotax. Thousands of people returned the software (myself being one of them) and let Intuit know about it (again I did), A few months later I get a nice letter telling me that next year they will not be using activation and to please come back to Intuit.
I won't be.. I'll use Taxcut Pro again.. Cheaper and I found to do the job just as well.
When companies use the theoretical losses from piracy (how completely ignorant to assume that every pirated copy would translate to a purchased copy) they can be reactive. When their customers go elsewhere the loss of dollars quickly becomes real.
Symantec products are crap and for years I've been swaying anyone with a computer away from them. Maybe they should have taken some of the money they spent on product activation and spent it on creating a better product. If they were smart they would give the program away for FREE and just charge for the virus defs.
Karma means nothing to me, so suck it...
Do you realize that an obvious guess for the plural of Elvis is (treating it as fourth declension) Elves
? (Elvii is not a possible guess in Latin.)
(But, as 2 syllable pronounciation.)
I had a similar problem with an eternal virus scan, and crashing. Turned out I had a physical problem on the
hard-drive. I suggest that you run several different hard-drive scan utilities and see if your disk is in perfect shape.
I don't know how many people are aware of this. You do not need a subscription to the automatic updater to get DAT file updates from Symantec. This is probably where they try to confuse people. There is no mention of it in the program, however you can download these updates for free on their website, use of LiveUpdate not required.
Need I say more?
www.free-av.com
I believe that sales will go down because of activation. Here's the simple analogy. Most consumers go out and buy a software program. They then proceed to go install it on all the computers they use instead of just one like the license says. Well when they find out they only can install it on one computer, they go with the competition instead which allows it even though it is illegal. Therefore the company that went with activation originally, will lose sales because of this. Forcing consumers to let them install it on only one computer when they want to install it on multiple computers will only make them go with the competition instead which doesn't have activation. Thats how intuit lost revenue with its activation I bet.
Now my idea for activation is this and its simple. If it's only for one computer, when its activated have it recorded in the company's database with a unique hash that is also recorded on the users computer. Now when the product is activated the customer has full control of the product including being able to get updates, etc... When its not activated its disabled and no updates are allowed. Now if the consumer wants to install the product on another computer, they simply deactivate the product over the internet which deletes the hash from the local computer and the company's database. Then the user can go install it on another computer and activate it from their. You wouldn't need to limit the installations at all. Now if the hd dies and the user has to reinstall it, they'd just call the company up, the company would delete it from their database and the consumer would be able to install and activate it again. Now if the hash is on the local computer and the product is activated but it isn't in the company's database, the product automatically deactivates itself and asks the consumer to reactivate the product. Doing it this way would eliminate any problems activation ever had. You can even do it over the phone as well since both the product and the company's database would be updated. And just to clarify, whenever the customer would have the product updated, it would check to see if its activated or not and then go do what I said above. This kind of activation would be easy.
I installed SystemWorks 2002 on my wife's computer (yes, I let her run Windows ;-), and once the virus subscription ran out it went into daily nag-mode, popping up a subscription renewal box at random times throughout the day, and with NO WAY to tell it to never pop up again. As far as I can tell, Symantec will not allow me to continue with the current level of protection without the continual nag box -- either I live with it, subscribe, or uninstall.
I'll never buy anything from them again.
Isn't DRM/copy protection/activation a bit like a trojan? Its running unwanted code on user's machine, can cause denial of service and often resorts to making undocumented changes on user's system that can cause user to loose data (anyone remembers the TurboTax fiasco?). Talk about attacking whom you swore to protect.
Say a virus formats my hard drive and I restore from an infected backup? Will Norton Antivirus think its running on a different machine, deactivate itself and prevent me from getting an update to clean it up?
Maybe this will keep the constant spam I get for Norton Anti Virus to a minimum.
"It is intended to protect consumers from widespread counterfeit copies of Symantec programs."
No it is intended to protect Symantec from widespread loss of cash from sales. I'm fine with my counterfeit copy, thanks. Don't protect me.
Trolls dont like to be Flamebait, because they burn so well. Protect our Troll heritage!
I expect the people that are capable of creating a good virus scanner and are interested in contributing code to an open source project mostly use systems where security is a priority. And as such would rather spend time to fix the security issues that allow virii and worms to spread and contribute to security pojects that have broader applications in the areas of intrusion detection, firewalls, proxy servers... etc.
Later, Seeker
Here's a different question:
What if I have only one computer, but I dual-boot two different versions of Windows. Do I still ened to buy two copies of the software? That seems pretty unfair. After all, it's not like I can use them both at the same time. In fact, don't the user agreement state that one person can use the software on one computer? That's exactly what I want to do. I'm one person, and I'm only using one computer. So...
I thought we were talking about NAV. Does McAfee also have product activation?
Clearly, he/she is using a pirated and version and knows they do update correctly.
From friends and relatives , I can verify the pirate versions work correctly.
Oh, and the reason I'm calling you stupid, is because only a stupid person would give you their name and tell you they're using pirated software, hence the AC label.
But those are the facts, stupid.
You seem to be one of about 3 people on here not talking out of their ass. This is exactly the case.
That's pure baloney, as anyone familiar with the corporate mindset would understand. The reason that Symantec is going for product activation is to try and make more money. They try to make us believe that it is for the user's benefit, but it really has nothing to do with that. Product activation hasn't been working for Microsoft (in terms of reducing illegal copying and increasing revenues) and it is unlikely to work for a major brand such as Symantec. And given the highly competitive nature of the anti-virus business, I suspect that many users will simply look elsewhere rather than deal with being prejudged a criminal. I certainly will, and I've been a long-time Symantec user. Oh well. Not my bottom line.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
"Counterfeit copies of the product will be unable to access these updates, lulling users into a false sense of security. "
This is completely wrong and false.
Its much simpler than you think, and warez'd copies can download updates.
Please don't post when you're just talking out of your ass. Or, just say "Well, I'm only talking out my ass, because I don't have a fucking clue...".
Seriously.
Add this fine folks to the growing list of muthraf&#(#rs who go up against the wall cum da revolution!
Norton AntiVirus is very low-quality software. Good softwares must give warning when memory space gets low and must not crash. It is very easy method to implement in software language. Also, no refund for Norton AntiVirus in Japan is bad policy. I think more and more people cannot buy the Symantec/Norton softwares again in Japan. It is because recently their reputation by educated people in Japan is getting badly damaged.
While $50 copies of office are obviously fake...microsoft and others in the industry have long turned a blind eye at OEM copies.
I find symantec's broad definition of "piracy" to be laughable...they made the discs, they distributed them to people who didnt make pcs they didnt audit any of the businesses selling their products. They are not counterfeit, they register properly with the Symantec site.
Im sure when symantec comes out with their product activation the new version OEM cds will work just fine.
I do respect symantec efforts at keeping counterfeit versions of their software off the market...but to lump OEM with fakes as "counterfeit" is shady. If they want to claim that the OEM copies are unlicensed for retail sale thats fair and stop distributing to dealers who sell OEM copies retail thats fine too. Most dealers technically comply with the OEM license by including a $3 network card or some other doodad with it.
Does anyone else imagine this guy's PC as a windows 98 box with about 356378423 taskbar icons running in the background?
I use Kerio personal firewall (free home edition) and does some of this stuff. You can manually add MD5 checksums and play with the firewall rules.
The Singularity is closer than you think
Quant
In an related story, the publishers of the Norton Anthology and the estate of the late Art Carney have sued Symantec for copyright violation.