New Update Norton's extension offers extra protection against phishing

[francis de lorraine]

hello i find that the norton extension is improving on phising

 

[Moonhorse]

More details? What makes you think it have been improving lately?

personaly i think it will never beat netcraft when it comes into phishing protection.
And malware wide probably bitdefender trafficlight is the best option right now
PuP wide malwarebytes probably , but it has alot false positives aswell

If you are using norton antivirus, you dont need the extension

 

[francis de lorraine]

[QUOTE = "Moonhorse, post: 774512, member: 72712"] Plus de détails? Qu'est-ce qui vous fait penser que cela s'est amélioré récemment?

Personnellement, je pense que Netcraft ne sera jamais mieux battu en matière de protection contre le phishing.
Et les logiciels malveillants large probablement bitlightreender Trafficlight est la meilleure option pour le moment
PuP wide malwarebytes probablement, mais il a aussi beaucoup de faux positifs

Si vous utilisez l’antivirus Norton, vous n’avez pas besoin de l’extension [/ QUOTE]
hello i have norton security and with its extension i test the phising url's and today i see that it is much more reactive than before

 

[Eddie Morra]

Detection ratio's vary on a daily basis because vendors have good days and bad days. Whether various malicious websites have been collected and submitted on communities/for analysis by other researchers may also affect the detection ratio from an AV vendor because some AV vendors actually use bots to automatically collect URLs submitted on various places (or manually collect them from various places).

Telemetry levels in a solution can also affect detection ratio's because it can provide more URL intelligence. For example, there could be an underlying scoring system which when triggered will cause a URL to be sent back to the vendor through telemetry for inspection, but without blocking access to the page because whether it is malicious or not is deemed unknown at that current time and these systems usually work as default-allow. More telemetry can in some cases mean the vendor has an upper-edge over less-intrusive vendors.

The cold truth which a lot of people do not want to hear is that default-allow will inevitably eventually fail if you put enough up against it - eventually it'll hit its tolerance level and will not be able to prevent something. It's a hit or miss situation for every single website when it comes to web-based filtering because it works as a default-allow system.

I've always found Norton to be effective at most of what it does... and I am a fan of features like SONAR. They've definitely improved their home solutions recently as well for stability.

 

[jetman]

Is it worth using the Norton extension alongside others such as kasperky, in order to acheive a more comprehensive protection ?

Or is that just wasting CPU resources and slowing down browsing for little benefit ?

 

[Moonhorse]

Is it worth using the Norton extension alongside others such as kasperky, in order to acheive a more comprehensive protection ?

Or is that just wasting CPU resources and slowing down browsing for little benefit ?

Kaspersky is enough

 

[LDogg]

If you're looking for protection against Phishing use the Netcraft extension or install Forticlient web filter.

~LDogg

 

[ForgottenSeer 58943]

Or use Pi-Hole on a Raspberry Pi and point your DNS back to a local cache/resolver with a Quad9 forward and never worry about it again. It's also way faster with the 10,000 website cache default on DNSMasq.

Strongly recommended and takes no advanced knowledge. Then you can toss ALL of the extensions in the trash. Even adblocker ones.

 

[francis de lorraine]

[QUOTE = "Moonhorse, post: 774512, member: 72712"] Plus de détails? Qu'est-ce qui vous fait penser que cela s'est amélioré récemment?

Personnellement, je pense que Netcraft ne sera jamais mieux battu en matière de protection contre le phishing.
Et les logiciels malveillants large probablement bitlightreender Trafficlight est la meilleure option pour le moment
PuP wide malwarebytes probablement, mais il a aussi beaucoup de faux positifs

Si vous utilisez l’antivirus Norton, vous n’avez pas besoin de l’extension [/ QUOTE]
hello, the web analysis engine(toolbar) is no longer compatible with google chrome and firefox so the safe web norton extension is essential

 

[francis de lorraine]

and from a source on i would say that norton is a effective as kaspersky

 

[bribon77]

[QUOTE = "Moonhorse, post: 774512, member: 72712"] Plus de détails? Qu'est-ce qui vous fait penser que cela s'est amélioré récemment?

Personnellement, je pense que Netcraft ne sera jamais mieux battu en matière de protection contre le phishing.
Et les logiciels malveillants large probablement bitlightreender Trafficlight est la meilleure option pour le moment
PuP wide malwarebytes probablement, mais il a aussi beaucoup de faux positifs

Si vous utilisez l’antivirus Norton, vous n’avez pas besoin de l’extension [/ QUOTE]
hello, the web analysis engine(toolbar) is no longer compatible with google chrome and firefox so the safe web norton extension is essential

I recommend you: DeepL Translator

 

[harlan4096]

@francis de lorraine: please kindly post in English...