Is Norton any good these days? Should I buy this antivirus?
- Thread starter francis de lorraine
- Start date
Please provide comments and solutions that are helpful to the author of this topic.
- Status
I wouldn't recommend it a few years ago. But it has improved a lot this last year and offers very good protection. You should definitely try it before buying, of course.
Recent update adds another layer of ransomware protection
Feature changes:
Feature changes:
- Backup file versioning: When a file changes and the new version is backed up the user can now browse and restore previous versions of the file.
- Now Online is the default location in the backup set (second backup set).
https://community.norton.com/en/system/files/u988853/Pasted image at 2017_09_13 11_37 AM_0.png - Ransomware Heuristics: A new layer of protection has been added to monitor and block Ransomware-like behaviour
- WDSC integration: Product has been updated to provide the status of Threat Protection and Firewall in the new Windows Defender Security Center in the upcoming Windows 10 Fall Creators Update (link is external) (Redstone 3) update.
Some recent youtube reviews here
July Test
August Test
September Tests
October Test
Likes - Great malicious/phishing URLs removal. File detection ratio is of mixed results
Some negatives like
slow response (....analysing)
unable to remove some malwares
clunkyness and unpolish in usability
not good against zero-days
not good against keyloggers
above average result against ransomware
Overall - Get a better product
July Test
August Test
September Tests
October Test
Likes - Great malicious/phishing URLs removal. File detection ratio is of mixed results
Some negatives like
slow response (....analysing)
unable to remove some malwares
clunkyness and unpolish in usability
not good against zero-days
not good against keyloggers
above average result against ransomware
Overall - Get a better product
Last edited:
Norton still regards as the top anti-virus software due to its bellow key features:
- Provides protection against viruses, spyware, malware, and other online attacks.
- Maintains your privacy, no matter what device you are using.
- Avoids unsafe websites and suspicious downloads.
- Lets you move protection from one device to another.
The free version of Norton antivirus is very draining on your system’s performance. It tends to control your computer more than it should, and it is full of ads. It is also slow. The paid version, while offering more features, is not necessary and still suffers the disadvantages, minus the part about ads.
I recommend you do not use Norton. My personal recommendation is that if you are running Windows 10, you use the built-in Windows Defender antivirus, coupled with the free version of Malwarebytes.
If you are using Windows 7 or Windows 8, which does not include Windows Defender, I suggest you use the Kaspersky. It is very light, and the ads can be turned off in settings.
I recommend you do not use Norton. My personal recommendation is that if you are running Windows 10, you use the built-in Windows Defender antivirus, coupled with the free version of Malwarebytes.
If you are using Windows 7 or Windows 8, which does not include Windows Defender, I suggest you use the Kaspersky. It is very light, and the ads can be turned off in settings.
Absolutely not true what you are saying.
Norton is very light on the system, great AV / Malware blocking.
Sonar and the Firewall are one of the best around.
I tried KIS and KIS is good in one thing, injecting all the pages you visit, nice for collecting all the data.
F
ForgottenSeer 58943
The most infected machines I have ever seen are always running Norton. Especially when Fileless malware is involved. One of my guys removed 1,500 pieces of malware/traces from a Norton protected machine last week as a good example. For some reason people think it is way better than it really is.
Norton ist light. I'm using norton security and dont feel any impact. The sonar is not bad.
F
ForgottenSeer 58943
Consumer Norton not SEP. SEP you can basically lock down as much as you want.
The most infected machines I have ever seen almost always seem to be running Norton.
tbh last time i did tests with Norton and SEP in malware hub, both performed the same, with same features/functions
and it didn't perform bad at all.
Norton's signatures are on par with the top ones, but Sonar is weak imo and having it set to the maximum will rape your computer, performance wise.
Sorry but i just don't believe you. Maybe a installation that was never updated. I am also an IT Professional and never seen any infection or what so ever.
F
ForgottenSeer 58943
You aren't much of an IT Professional if you've never seen an infection.. My guys in the remediation department remove 12,000+ infections a month so we have some pretty nice metrics to go off of. I sometimes post my Norton Horror Stories here with hilarious screenshots of Norton saying a PC is safe and 14 hallow processes running, but this time I didn't bother because I've done it enough. I suppose my posts with screenshots are around here somewhere if I cared to look. But it isn't my job to convince you it's rubbish, just figured I would warn people.
Did not mean to offend you, offcourse i have seen infections. But never with Norton enabled
I
illumination
That's interesting, as I have found, if users I'm fixing a system for, were running Norton, the main cause of them becoming infected was out of date software if not even expired. Now I have seen many "PUPS" slide by Norton, but for the most part, anything "Unknown" is flagged as so, and addresses this with a prompt and file information allowing the user to determine "which is not always a good thing".
As for Norton being trash, that is a matter of perspective. Norton has one of the strongest Intelligent Firewalls/IPS, Very good signatures, Sonar, and a basic Deny/Default with flagging Unknowns. I have at times placed it through the wringer in the VM, and Norton stood it's own ground.
That said, i'm personally still disappointed in the use of Ask for their Safe Search, and wonder if they ever did away with those damn toolbars..
Last edited by a moderator:
I never understood why Norton used Ask for their Safe Search either @PathFinder . Personally, I have used Norton for a long time. I use some other great tools too as one could see if they look at my security config. Some say I am overboard on what I do for security, but I say one cannot be too secure. Just don't play with fire and one will be fine. I think Norton is good, but this is my own opinion. I still test Norton in VMs just to see how it would fair and it fairs good by itself on default settings. Tweaked with some more advanced settings and other stuff that I use I say it’s good.
@ForgottenSeer 58943 I hear you on infections. Indeed, there are some not so great security stories I can talk about KIS, Norton, ESET and the works. It all boils down to good security hobbits. I have seen computers with KIS have a bunch of crud on the computer while the software reports in just fine. Best thing for anyone to do is make sure the software stays updated and use some on demand scanners. That and have some good security add-ons for web browsers.
Great points being made in the tread!
~Brian
@ForgottenSeer 58943 I hear you on infections. Indeed, there are some not so great security stories I can talk about KIS, Norton, ESET and the works. It all boils down to good security hobbits. I have seen computers with KIS have a bunch of crud on the computer while the software reports in just fine. Best thing for anyone to do is make sure the software stays updated and use some on demand scanners. That and have some good security add-ons for web browsers.
Great points being made in the tread!
~Brian
D
Deleted member 178
Norton like most of AVs do pretty decent job, some slightly better than others; the user is often the dumb one happy clicking on every file they can...
- Status
