Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Security Businesses Software The Internet

Symantec Hopes To Deliver Anti-Virus Online 148

Posted by Zonk
from the no-more-delivery-media dept.
daria42 writes "Symantec today said it will slowly move towards supplying its consumer applications online as services." From the article: "Sykes also said there was the possibility that tiny pieces of an application or a single virus scan could be resold by organisations such as online banks, which may choose to ensure their customers are not infected with a virus or spyware before they log on to their account ... This could be paid for by the customer using their credit card or by adding it to their mobile phone bill by sending a text message, said Sykes, who warned that banks could decide not to provide access to anyone with an infected computer."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Symantec Hopes To Deliver Anti-Virus Online

Comments Filter:
  • Broken Internet (Score:5, Interesting)

    by theRiallatar (584902) on Thursday December 08, 2005 @11:49AM (#14211265)
    What happens when a virus or spyware cripples your ability to launch the service via the web? What happens when you want to boot into a safe, standalone environment (no web access) and scan?
    • Well, in the former case, I guess you're going to have to get someone tech-savvy to sort things out, and in the latter, you're going to have to have the full-pop version.
    • It sounds to me like the perfect place for a two fronted attack. 1) An online virus scan at your bank/credit card/stock trading website and 2) A virus scan that runs in a 'safe, standalone environment'. It would be best if the two scanners worked on different algorithms so that if one was tricked odds are the other would not be.

      Thats why I use AVG at home and still scan with varous online AV programs.

      • Re:Broken Internet (Score:3, Interesting)

        by IAmTheDave (746256)
        An online virus scan at your bank/credit card/stock trading website

        So... does that mean I have to install an ActiveX component on my browser? Or perhaps enable a JAVA applet? Do I have to wait for the bank to scan my entire HD every time I want to check my balance? Does this require me to use IE? Can I still check my balance using Linux or OSX computers?

        Don't get me wrong. I certainly understand that safety is important, and I support the idea of an ISP dropping a customer off of the net if their

        • That is a good point. Perhaps an ISP based virus scan, weekly or monthly would be a better option. If it could be with user approval only, without hogging bandwidth, and not look at private data or recording the kind of files on a computer it could be a good thing. Also, the ISP might be more willing to accommodate non MS Windows.
          • Maybe you are just not paying attention to the very header of the article:

            "Symantec Hopes To Deliver Anti-Virus Online"

            As in "Symantec hopes to find a new revenue stream to feed their wallets"

            _And_ look at a previous article: "Most Home PC Users Lack Security". Were I a Symantec exec I'd read it as "most users won't pay us a dime since they are not interested at all about antivirus security and all that stuff we sell for a living; we should find an alternative way to force them to pay us for, for... hell,
            • "most users won't pay us a dime since they are not interested at all about antivirus security and all that stuff we sell for a living;

              I've gotta wonder if this doesn't have something to do with the consumer culture. I see buying a computer with OS and then having to buy virus protection and a firewall to go with it akin to me buying a TV and Symantec wanting to sell me a fire extinguisher, because you know those TVs, they'll just catch fire...

              When a normal (non-Slashdot reading) consumer buys a comput

              • "they have some assumption that it comes with appropriate protections built in"

                Mine does. It came with Linux.

                "Why someone would spend $1000 on a computer and then have to spend more to not get a virus is something some people have difficulty swallowing."

                Well, I find it difficult too.
          • ISP's are not all that willing to accommodate "non MS-Windows" in my experience. When my connection was getting massive latency a couple of weeks ago, I was looking through my ISP's troubleshooting guide. They had all the basic, smack-yourself-in-the-head stuff (reboot your machine, reset the modem, etc.) which I'd tried, and very little else, but I noticed that in their "system requirements", they stated "Works on Windows or Macintosh computers only, unfortunately at this time service is not available for

    • Additionally, I guess we might expect a whole slew of bogus "Symantec Anti-Virus check online! Click here!" that actually propagate trojans and whatnot to unsuspecting users.
      You could get really paranoid and wonder if they are keeping a record of all you filenames, folders, etc. And if you're a repeating offender, will the bank ban you or (OMG!) even file a lawsuit against you?
      • > Additionally, I guess we might expect a whole slew of bogus "Symantec Anti-Virus check online! Click here!" that actually propagate trojans and whatnot to unsuspecting users.

        And after that, since the "software as a service" business model relies on the software always phoning home to what it assumes is a "trusted" source, and immediately executing whatever it's sent (or worse, listening on all ports for "update" requests :), all the worm authors need to do is make it download the next trusted update

      • I'm worried for the opposite reason. On Linux or Mac, the antivirus probably won't run, simply because it'll be a windows only thing. Would the bank ban me from using their website, because it couldn't confirm that my computer was "clean"?

        And even if they let me log in, but increase the banking charges to cover their payments to Symantec, what should I, as a Mac user do? Or as Windows user who trust AVG more and has thus payed for an AVG license? Or even worse as a Linux user, where I'm forced to pay Window
    • The other day I spent over an hour fixing a friend's computer. She couldn't visit secure sites with IE. To help me determine if the problem was with IE itself or the system's networking in general, I downloaded Firefox, and it couldn't get online at all. A little googling showed me the problem was due to Norton Internet Security being fucked up. [computing.net] Learning that, I had to jump through many hoops to uninstall it. [symantec.com]

      Fuck Symantec.
  • And what if I want to scan my machine using other, free AV solutions? And what if I am on (gulp) Linux, or a Mac? Punished for the actions of the majority? Tch-oh.
    • Or if you opt not to pay for the "service" ?

      OTOH, if this were M$ doing this, I'd be much more concerned, but there's still some competition among the AV vendors, and enough Mac and *nix users that the banks probably won't block them all out for not being able to run some activeX virus control.

      Plus, who relies on a web service to check their system for virii? That seems... uh.... mildly stupid, giving admin rights to a web app. I'd presume it'd be signed and whatnot, but still...
  • Linux? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Rydia (556444) on Thursday December 08, 2005 @11:51AM (#14211294)
    So, uh... what about those of us that run just linux? Will banks assume we're clean, or will they just lock us out because Symantec's stuff returns an error? That's a pretty big concern.
    • Wait... They make viruses for linux....
      hmmmmm... haven't gotten one yet
    • Re:Linux? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by MankyD (567984)
      Will banks assume we're clean...?
      I hope not. Not for fear of linux viruses one way or the other, but because of browser (http header) spoofing. There's no sure fire way of knowing someone's browser and os. You need a plugin or extension that provides authentication (a feature I'm sure these AV services provide.)
      • "I hope not"

        I'm quite afraid yes.

        I almost can see it:
        "Your system can't be guaranteed to be free of virus.
        Since our banking on-line services only proceeds to the highest security standards, you shuould upgrade to the latest version of Ms Explorer and configure your browser to accept cookies.
        Your friendly on-line banking system".
    • they will keep operating like normal and won't integrate symantec's garbage. think of the number of clients a bank has times the cost of a license for this. besides that, it limits the number of customers that can use their service. i know guys that work for the IT dept. of banks and none of them are fans of Symantec's products.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Thankfully I've already moved away from Symantec products. There are some situations where offering software as online services is not necessarily the best idea. I would put critical system utilities in that category.
  • I don't want to (Score:4, Insightful)

    by NotoriousGOD (936922) on Thursday December 08, 2005 @11:56AM (#14211327)
    What if I don't want to pay my bank for a stupid virus service. My bank should be a BANK. What, is Norton going to help me save money in a high interest bearing account now? Businesses should stick to what they do, so they do it best, instead of trying to be "user friendly".
    • Because everyone knows that banks get a lot of viruses from people checking their account balances online....it's like the easiest way to trasmit a virus into a bank's critical systems....by checking your account balance....yeah! /heavy sarcasm
      • I crashed B of A last week with the Cookie Monster Virus and checking my bank account at 11:11pm. I was pissed off because they gave me an overdraft charge.
      • The banks won't be doing this to protect their end of things, they're doing it to protect the virus from capturing your login stuff and sending it to someone. That's my guess anyway.
    • I don't think they're trying to be user friendly. They're just not interested in fielding calls from customers who have suffered fraud because some spyware keystroke logger ripped off the customer's online banking ID, which was then used to transfer money to some crook. The bank is trying to protect itself, which then in turn helps the customer. Seems like a good idea to me.
      • But this means that the bank would have a right to stop you from accessing your online bankaccount and then force you to pay for a service that's not even delivered by the bank, but a third party. And secondly, how in the world is anyone going to transfer a virus or keystroke logger by logging into their bank account. Maybe the banks should get a better web programmer and look up the definition of 'security' in a standard dictionary.
        • And secondly, how in the world is anyone going to transfer a virus or keystroke logger by logging into their bank account

          That's not the concern, the banks are worried about people who already have keyloggers installed that will snoop the account information when the user logs into the bank online site.

    • Re:I don't want to (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Nikker (749551)
      The only reason I could see this as a GoodThing(TM) is for keyloggers. As a bank I wouldn't care if your computer ran or not because that's completely on your side of the fence. To give a warm and fuzzy feeling to you more than anyone that your not being jacked for the data your entering to what ever PC your using at the time.

      That brings to my mind additional questions, would I want to pay additional money evrey time I use the banks services? By paying this will it insure as in insurance that if I do
  • This is news? (Score:5, Informative)

    by TheSpoom (715771) * <slashdot@@@uberm00...net> on Thursday December 08, 2005 @11:56AM (#14211333) Homepage Journal
    McAfee's been doing this for years and when I was doing tech support, I frequently recommended my customers use Trend Micro HouseCall [trendmicro.com], a free online virus scan, whenever their current virus scanner wasn't working or wasn't installed.
  • No guaranties (Score:3, Insightful)

    by BentSorenDahl (879286) on Thursday December 08, 2005 @11:57AM (#14211346)
    "... which may choose to ensure their customers are not infected with a virus or spyware before they log on to their account."

    Just because the antivirus scanner doesn't find anything doesn't nessesarily need to mean that there are none.

  • Uh, no thanks... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by maillemaker (924053) on Thursday December 08, 2005 @11:57AM (#14211351)
    Every time I see a pop-up advertisement that says:

    "YOUR COMPUTER COULD BE INFECTED WITH SPYWARE - CLICK HERE"

    It sends up huge red flags for me, and I always shut them down without clicking. I've seen so many of them (wanting to optimize my Windows, etc.) that I'm now gun shy of any such remote scanning application.

    I'll be thinking long and hard about letting anything scan my system through my firewall.

    Steve
  • by Akardam (186995) on Thursday December 08, 2005 @11:57AM (#14211352)
    Maybe I'm a bit jaded at having been in the computer support industry for too long, but with the proliferation of nasties these days that disrupt internet connectivity in one form or another, I'm skeptical as to whether this is going to actually work. Hell, a good percentage of infections these days, be they viruses or malware, require manual cleaning, often from safe mode or self contained non-volatile bootable media. Even Symantec overwhelmingly recommends booting to safe mode to clean infections in most of their AV DB articles.
  • Well not likley because someone is likely to scream discrimination of sorts. As in the real world everyone is *supposed* to be treated fairly even if you can't control yourself ('severely handicapped').

    I would imagine that if anything comes of this idea, is that just a server side detection mechanisim that sells ads to vistors saying something similar to spam ads like your computer is infected blah blah blah. However if that ad came from my bank and I was aware that they had this kind of service i would be
  • by Hakubi_Washu (594267) <robert...kosten@@@gmail...com> on Thursday December 08, 2005 @12:00PM (#14211378) Homepage
    If I were a credit institute/bank/whatever, I'd:

    Step 1: Offer virus scanning for a charge
    Step 2: Require my customers to be virus-free
    Step 3: Since I can only be sure they are virus-free after they have been checked (With my scanner, since I can't be bothered to support other peoples solutions): PROFIT!

    Add to this the legitimate question about other OSes and AV-solutions and you have a bona fide extortion scheme.
    But then, I'm a computer scientist, so I don't do "online banking" anyway...
    • I don't think that's a big concern. Any bank that tries this will watch their tech-savy customers flee to other banks, leaving their online services a deserted wasteland.
      • Yes, look at how effective the tech-savvy population has been in affecting other online institution's practices... Oh wait, the average dumb computer-user still outpopulates (and breeds quicker)
        • Where have I implied otherwise? Did I say "Let's all <whatever>, so they don't try this scheme!"?

          I speak for mayself and myself only. And for me it is a concern, based on prior experience with "business practices". That doesn't mean I think there's anything I (or even some metaphysical "we") could or should do about it.
    • Banks cannot and probably will not do this. First, banks are heavily regulated entities. Secondly, this would be a clear violation of antitrust laws: it deprives me of a choice to use my own virus-scanner. It is a bundle of antivirus services and banking services. Lastly, banks will not do this because they cannot make too much money off of it. Who's going to use this service? Customers of online banking can move easily with their feet.

  • by knight37 (864173) * on Thursday December 08, 2005 @12:00PM (#14211382) Homepage Journal
    Who cares? Who even uses this crap? If you don't have an active virus-shield style app scanning all the time you're just asking to get infected these days. I can't count the number of times that AntiVir Personal Edition [free-av.com] virus shield (free for individual home use) has saved me from a virus or trojan while browsing. If I had to rely on a web-based scanner I'd be infected FIRST before I knew about it later.
    • Frankly, if you're open to getting a virus or trojan WHILE BROWSING, you're using the wrong browser/OS.

      There are plenty of options where this just isn't a possibility. Use one, any one.
    • Really? I have never been infected with a virus, and I don't bother with anti-virus software. Yes, I do use Windows, but I monitor the system myself and run code in sandboxes when I deem it necessary.

      • I used to agree with this sentiment. But I no longer do with the appearance of "zero day" viruses with malicious code. Add to that most virus scanners do not detect all virus' and many windows users are in a precarious position.

        You are most likely infected and just do not know it it yet. I bet 90% of Windows users are in this boat.

        I would qualify that this applies to those that are connected to the internet. And since you are posting to slashdot, I do believe you are connected to the internet.

        An "I can't be
  • I must admit that I didn't read TFA but the summary suggests that banks could reject logins from infected computers. Clearly the scan result would have to be submitted to the bank server, or a client-side script could verify the negative scan result. This would be much cheaper than using server/agent solution that many corporations employ for corporate desktops and applications. Of course this would force viruses to spoof these results, thus negating any benefit until the information is cryptographically p
  • Punk Buster (Score:5, Interesting)

    by LiquidCoooled (634315) on Thursday December 08, 2005 @12:06PM (#14211444) Homepage Journal
    This model for killing viruses sounds very much like the code gamers are getting used to seeing.

    Its down to trust.

    Before you can come on MY website, you have to run MY code. If you run my code and it gives the wrong result, then your fucked.

    Problems, OS dependence, other people have mentioned already, but another is security - what kind of permissions do I have to give to allow arbitary code to be run which can access the running list of applications and OS internals, how do I know the code being run is safe?

    Would you really feel safe opening up so much of your machine for a general internet site?

    We are moving away from internet explorer and the nightmare of activeX, lets not go back to it.

    After thought, if the banks implimented this as a standalone application and it did this scan as part of its initial authentication (like the gaming world), I would be less bothered than expecting this kind of code to be run in a browser. strange isn't it.
    • very much like the code gamers are getting used to seeing.

      Very true. But then, I've been driven away from online FPS games because of this. It seems like every game these days wants to run some scanner as admin that's going to capture who-knows-what information from my machine. Not gonna happen. And I'm not going to set up a gaming-only machine just to allow some server admin to invade my privacy.
  • Bad idea (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    So, in order to access my bank account, I have to agree to let the bank install software on my computer that will examine all the files and programs running on my computer and report back to the bank. If I don't agree with their policy, I don't get to have a bank account? Whatever happend to unreasonable search an seasure laws?
    • Whatever happend to unreasonable search an seasure laws?

      Online banking is an option. Use the physical bank if you are paranoid.

      -everphilski-
  • by sckeener (137243) on Thursday December 08, 2005 @12:08PM (#14211463)
    Are they only going to scan active processes running? My virus scans take forever.

    I can imagine trying to connect to my bank and waiting for the virus scan. I will getting bored and wander off. Then the bank would kick me off due to inactivity because it finished the scan while I wasn't looking.
    • it will most likely be a "stinger" style scan, only checking for major known threats. And since the threats Symantec knows about could fit onto a postage stamp, my guess is scan time wont be an issue
  • So lets get this straight:

    I log into my online banking site.
    It downloads (perhaps w/o my permission) and ActiveX component that scans my system.
    It says I'm ok, so I can log in.

    Except what if I have ActiveX disabled?
    What happens if I use a Mac/Linux/BSD?
    What happens if my native language isn't English?
    What happens if I'm not running WinXP2000Plus?
    What happens if I am running IE version 5.5.0123456 with HotFix 7890?

    This sounds like a "hey we need money, and our traditional channels aren't making enough, so le
    • Oh, oh, and:

      What happens if I haven't set my computer up in such a dumb way as to delibrately allow web sites to scan my HD.

      I'm twitchy enough about letting Javascript run on my system, I avoid Active X like the plague...
  • by msimm (580077) on Thursday December 08, 2005 @12:16PM (#14211528) Homepage
    What interest is it of the banks to purchase such a product? Everything comes down to the bottom line, hows this going to help?

    Just because some exec comes up with a snassy (new?) idea and starts talking it up doesn't mean it will find its home in the marketplace.

    To me this sounds annoying, plain and simple. As a bank exec I'd really be scratching my head trying to figure out how my customers win (which makes me win).
  • Maybe it's time to start a letter writing campaign? Make your voice heard before this happens. Banks like you keeping your money there, if they start getting letters from members letting them know accounts will be closed before this becomes defacto for online banking it will carry more weight.
  • Any bank that tried this would loose my business that day. You do not blackmail me into running your code on my computer. Why should I trust your code, or even allow it on my machine? Why should I pay for the privilege of accessing my own money through the bank? And why would a bank care what I check my balance with anyway? I'm not uploading files to the bank, I'm sending HTTP requests over SSL to its web server. If I can somehow infect its servers from my computer, the bank has a HUGE problem (there
  • by beeswax (65749) on Thursday December 08, 2005 @12:22PM (#14211586)
    Norton was decent when Peter Norton used to run the show. When he sold his company to Symantec, I have noticed the software turn into bloated crap. People seem to believe Norton is the best still, it used to be great in the mid-90s, but now it is garbage.

    For anyone that buys Norton, I would try Nod32 instead, I think it is the best one out there if you're willing to spend money.

    For those of you who prefer a free antivirus, I would try Antivir, it is much better than AVG.
  • Nice of Symantec to decide to catch up. TrendMicro's House Call [trendmicro.com] site offers an free online virus scan that is able to detect and remove any virus that can be removed with their other products. It's an ActiveX control based scanner though so it's not cross platform, though the biggest need for this service is by far windows. Very useful site, has saved me a ton of headaches with remote users who have been infected by viruses that have taken down their local virus scanner (usually symantec) by killing it'
  • I would tell Symantec that their product must be able to run as advertised on additional hardware and software platforms. If poorly designed and implemented, there will be a huge detrimental impact to consumers who will get angry with their online banks, merchants, or even their ISP and could very well stick it to these companies and Symantec where it counts...the pocketbook.
  • The clumsy, bloated feel to the leading AV "solutions" always seem pretty much like spyware to me.

    Long processes running at startup.
    Little do-nothing-of-value icons in the task tray.
    Pop-up windows artlessly trying to sell me a subscription renewal, and referring me to a web page with so many links and visual clutter than I don't even know which product thereon is MINE.

    I do all the computing I can these days on my Powerbook, and try to restrict the types of computing on the XP box to those which reduce my ri
    • Little do-nothing-of-value icons in the task tray.

      Not to single out your comment, but I've seen this often, as a complaint about many products. "Oh no, they put an icon in my task tray, I'm doomed!". I don't get it. The task tray is the place where all the uselesss crap goes, and it hides most of itself by default. Why is this even a concern? Anyone?
  • ...to the rear! Now NAV can bone your PC over the Internet without having to do it the old fashioned way by installing it!

    Oh joy. All we need is a BHO that leeches onto ports 25 and 110 in IE just waiting for an IE weakness to be exploited turning every open browser into an open relay, never mind is bogged down by system processes causing it to pause long enough to timeout connections to your mail server.
  • but shouldn't they put effort into making their anti-virus work locally before they try to put it on the web?

    show of hands, how many of you have seen Norton stop being enabled at startup for no apparent reason? How many of you have found a virus norton either A. cant remove, or B. cant find. Ever noticed how much memory it takes up even when you're not running a scan? How many friends and family do you know who have just let their protection expire because their subscription renewal service was too laborio

    • Norton was truly a great product

      Yep, but not anymore. When I removed NAV from one of my customer's computers, it saved over 3 minutes in bootup time. Unfortunately, he had already bought the product before asking me first.

      Recently, I saw a deal for Norton, where after rebate you could get the product for free. I just kept on walking.

    • So true!

      What's really sad is the unwashed masses don't realize their little Norton programs don't protect them from crap! They aren't the least bit cautious of opening that unexpected zip archive their friend sent them.

      Whenever a friend/family member asks me to get rid of a virus I uninstal Norton before even trying to get rid of the virus and install AVG Free.
  • Quite worrying... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Bert64 (520050) <bert@slaSLACKWAR ... com minus distro> on Thursday December 08, 2005 @12:27PM (#14211642) Homepage
    If consumers get used to allowing their banks to execute code on their systems, then they become even more vulnerable to phishing scams... Phishing sites will have their own "virus checking" tools, just like the real banks, except these tools will install malware instead of trying to remove it..

    Also virus checkers will be useless against more targetted attacks which are being seen more often nowadays, small attacks against customers of a particular organisation which don`t become widespread enough to get noticed by antivirus vendors..

    And finally those of us not using windows systems or not using ie may get turned away since we're not able to run the virus checker (and most likely wouldn`t need to in any case).. I don`t think firefox provides a way to execute code with access to your local filesystem (for obvious security reasons) in the same way that activex does.
  • By delivering security features such as virus scanning online, Sykes believes the footprint of its applications will no longer be an issue: "Once you move to the service situation then the footprint becomes almost irrelevant.

    So by this reasoning, if we made the OS, word processors, spreadsheets all services, we could all go back to the orignal 64k PC's with 8088's running at 4mhz? I think I still have my Timex Sinclair with 16k at home, maybe I'll be able to put that to some use now.
    --
    Q
  • What happens to all this talent and product they are absorbing by sucking up all these small (and large)companies? Surely someone at symantec knew this was silly.

    Why doesn't symantec sell any of @stakes products? What are those guys doing now?

    Seems like a lot of things they acquire just stagnate or simply cease to exist alltogether.

    I'm actually afraid that that might happen with the veritas purchase.

    Don't get me wrong they are on the ball with a lot of stuff, but this kind of thing really gets you scratchin
  • Once Norton Utilies was good, Partition Magic was good, and NAV wasn't annoying. Now NAV significantly slows down performance, and for the personal edition, requires it revalidate itself over the internet all the time REQUIRING user input. So... I removed NAV from most of my computers; NAV is supposed to be seamless. And some of us STILL want to check for viruses offline.

    Personally, I think this is an attempt by Symantec to grab an opportunity for advertising revenue.

    And Symantec already has TOTALLY BOGU
  • A typical norton scan of my PC takes about 40mins. Does this mean I cant log into my online banking until the scan is finished and the results sent back. I could walk to my branch quicker than that!!

    What about the poor people on dial up connections.
  • we can fix this weak gate guarding your fort, all we need to do is cut hole from this part of the wall and plaster it into place at the gate. I mean using an internet service to scan for a virus is just aking for problems. It can, will, and is probably as we speak being hacked and exploited to the whims of the black hat masses. If its not on your computer how can you trust it will not be used as the method of infection for some virus.
  • I don't trust Symantec's junkware. Their software is slow and bloated. The day my bank requires this will be the day I find a new bank.
  • I bank with $sys$Sony, scan away

  • I mean, last time i looked on my favourite torrent site, it was already there.
  • I would have a problem if my bank wanted to run some software on my computer. But that is me, and I am sure alot of the /. crowd. However, the basic user may not care about viruses. If their software finds a virus/spyware app it should remove it free of charge, it also should point the person to somewhere to get a good reliable AV software. It is in the bank's interest to keep the computer virus free, since if your account is accessed and used fraudulently, they are going to replace the money in your accou
  • Nice, now when I do my online banking, I'll have to use their virus scan. When I go pay my credit cards online, I'll have to use their virus scan. When I go pay... well, you get the point. Leave ensuring my computer is clean up to me and whatever software I choose to use.
  • That makes me glad I don't partake in online banking :)

    On that note I can see both sides of the issues. I can see the concern of those who use online banking but at the same time if your virus infected machine somehow infects the banks servers(shouldn't be an issue but you never know) or causes all of your money in your accounts wiped out, guess who has to spend valuable resources to clean up your mess?

  • I just spent 45 minutes trying to figure out all the different things Norton AV put on my computer, then disabling them, and later uninstalling the thing altogether, why would I want to go through all that hassle again with my online banking?
  • "Symantec Hopes" (Score:3, Insightful)

    by multipartmixed (163409) on Thursday December 08, 2005 @01:29PM (#14212224) Homepage
    Symantec Hopes this, Symantec Hopes that..

    Symantec has been *hoping* to deliver something worthwhile ever since they stopped developing for DOS-mode.

    Face it, the Norton Utilities used to be *great*. Now they suck! Norton Anti-Virus has never been spectactular. Norton Ghost.. Well, Norton Ghost is pretty good; at least the version I have; it still runs under DOS4GW with a non-MS GUI.
  • There are going to be risks no matter what security products a bank provides to its customers. After a year and a half working as a malware analyst, I know well that a "Clean" Virus Scan will provide customers with nothing but a false sense of security. Sober for instance has currently has 20+ variants [f-secure.com] that are known. You can bet there are plenty of malware variants in the wild that have no signatures. What the banks need to do is provide their customers with adequate computer security and let the custome
  • by amcdiarmid (856796) <amcdiarm AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday December 08, 2005 @02:37PM (#14212935) Journal
    Step 1: Hack Bank & have $rand clients told they are infected; Redirect to fake Norton Site.

    Step 2: Take Credit information, infect client PC; churn disk for a while

    Step 3: Make ~$5 per client suckered

    Step 4: Rent out infected PCs for $$$$$$
  • Dont know about you guys but I think symantec is slowly going down the crapper. For the last three years it has been easier to remove a virus than upgrade their products. Now they want to put hooks out to the web to destroy the rest of your computer?

    No I am not bitter at all towards symantec as I earn a ton of cash trying to fix computers that users try to upgrade symantec on. Or just plain uninstall. I can only imagine what this new service is going to do for them

    My advice, Symantec, fix your exist

  • Once your system is compromised, the ONLY way to return to _known_ clean is wipe and start from _known_ good.

    When will these people GET IT THROUGH THEIR HEADS that the 'clean' 'wipe' 'quarantine' options are NOT sufficient.

    Am I totally missing something? Have I been brainwashed? AFAIK, you NEED to keep your system clean, you shouldn't be cleaning up after malware. Never had any malware on my Unix-like boxes (Mac and Linux), and I never plan on having one.

    A computer system is NOT like your body. There is no
  • This is nothing more than an attempt to further milk their customer base for additional monthly revenue.

    Right now they sell the core product and require a service subscription to receive updates. This will make the software modular, enabling them to charge more for the total product and in addition to the monthly revenue streams which companies are quickly becoming addicted to (notice how just about every company is trying to turn their "product" into a "service" requiring a monthly subscription).

  • Hasn't anyone ever got a false positive before? Won't this really hurt the truly innocent?
  • by Quiberon (633716) on Thursday December 08, 2005 @05:24PM (#14214419) Journal
    Look, really, it's my computer. Sometimes it's private (none of anyone else's business what it's doing); sometimes I want some help checking whether it in infected with a virus, bacterium, worm, amoeba, horse, elephant, or whatever. Sometimes it's doing something confidential between me and my employer; in which case the bank had better check with my employer if they want to do anything with the computer.
  • I had to reinstall my XP installation when I upgraded to a larger hard drive. Since I hadn't been entirely satisfied with Norton's tools lately, and had discovered other, better tools like Diskkeeper and FreeAV, I left Norton's out of the equasion. The result? My system is running MUCH faster than before. Antivirus scans of incoming emails happen near-instantaneously. Applications load in a fraction of the time they did before. I'm not getting horrible lags when playing games. The difference was amaz
  • The banks want to completely scan every file on my PC before they will allow me to do business with them (to make sure I am not carrying any data they consider to be detrimental).

    No way. Let's substitute some other businesses and see how it sounds.

    Sony BMG wants to completely scan every file on my PC before they will allow me to play one of their CD's (to make sure I don't have any copyright infringement apps). Well actually I guess the rootkit does this kind of stuff for them anyway.

    Disney wants to comple

The major difference between bonds and bond traders is that the bonds will eventually mature.

Working...