App Review Old Norton vs New Norton - Engine Comparatif

[Artificial intelligence]

I have 1 key for norton till 2028 if anyone wants it. v24

Hello, I join the fight with Olegan for the license , if it's not too much trouble. . Thank you.

 

[roger_m]

I would not recommend the new Norton which is NorVast for the time being.
It is full of bugs. It didn't work well.

It's been running really well for me. While obviously you had issues, that won't be the case for everyone.

I wouldn't recommend it either after my experience above, but can you explain what you mean by "It's Norvast".

It is using technology from Avast and Norton.

 

[tofargone]

It's been running really well for me. While obviously you had issues, that won't be the case for everyone.

It is using technology from Avast and Norton.

ahh ok makes sense TY

 

[Szellem]

It's been running really well for me. While obviously you had issues, that won't be the case for everyone.

It is using technology from Avast and Norton.

Unfortunately, Norton V24 does not work well for me.
I had no problems with the previous ones. Specifically website slowdown, website not loading, etc. problems occurred. Plus, when the browser module would install, all three of my browsers ( Edge, FF, Chrome) would freeze and not install the module.
That's all I've discovered so far, but it was just enough for me.
Plus the usual Norton bullying purchase policy.

 

[Szellem]

ahh ok makes sense TY

Yes, Norton brand name with Avast engine. Norvast!

 

[Szellem]

He wasn't begging for it, someone offered a free license, although its probably not the best idea to be asking for something with your first post.

Yeah, but it's not in the first post.
And there are more elegant ways to do it. Of course, only if someone is in need and not a freeloader.

 

[Szellem]

Are Norton browser plug-ins required for web protection or not?

 

[nickstar1]

Are Norton browser plug-ins required for web protection or not?

Not really considering it uses avast web blocking. I would still keep Norton extension it's good for identifying bad pages. Avast might have top tier malware detection and pretty much keep your system safe from malware infections BUT the phishing protection is really not the best...

 

[Szellem]

Not really considering it uses avast web blocking. I would still keep Norton extension it's good for identifying bad pages. Avast might have top tier malware detection and pretty much keep your system safe from malware infections BUT the phishing protection is really not the best...

I ask because I am having trouble installing Norton Safe Web. If it is not necessary for proper web protection, I will skip it.
I do not unnecessarily load my web browser.

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

I ask because I am having trouble installing Norton Safe Web. If it is not necessary for proper web protection, I will skip it.
I do not unnecessarily load my web browser.

I always seem to get worse results in Norton safe browsing over Symantec one and Norton is heavier as well

Serious Discussion - [Extension] Symantec browser protection(Symantec intelligence)

seems like it uses web pulse( you can verify by seeing every link and script etc inside the page being sent to https://ent-shasta-rrs.symantec.com/webpulse/* by a GET request ) and to modify defaults to add more categories or set threat by changing (category_ids), (threat_level) the defaults...

malwaretips.com

Of course you can try other free extensions like harmony web protection wich is my favorite followed by Symantec (you can use both if you like although I would recommend not using more then three light extensions)
Btw any extension increases attack surface some more then others and these advanced extensions inject java script into sites as well (zero pishing technology)

Most secure browser would be with extensions installed maybe except something like no script that has the opposite effect overall

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

Not really considering it uses avast web blocking. I would still keep Norton extension it's good for identifying bad pages. Avast might have top tier malware detection and pretty much keep your system safe from malware infections BUT the phishing protection is really not the best...

lowest false positive extension and most lightweight for pishing although not the best is Microsoft defender and since Microsoft developed the extension it should only very slightly increase the attack surface and won't cause issues with performance like breaking page pre rendering , back forward cache or other security based ones that may allow an attack to inject code with the extension privileges


Example of performance based bad practice from debug bear research

Among extensions with over 1 million users we find 6 that break the back/forward cache:

LastPass Password Manager (10 million users)
Avast Online Security (8 million users)
Avira Browser Safety (6 million users)
Norton Password Manager (5 million users)
Snap&Read (4 million users)
Microsoft Editor (2 million users)

Overall 1.7% of the top 5,000 extensions break the back/forward cache

You can read here about attacking browser extensions

Attacking browser extensions

Learn about browser extension security and secure your extensions with the help of CodeQL.

github.blog

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

Are Norton browser plug-ins required for web protection or not?

Shouldn't be needed unless the extension doesn't use just regular security feeds

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

Unfortunately, Norton V24 does not work well for me.
I had no problems with the previous ones. Specifically website slowdown, website not loading, etc. problems occurred. Plus, when the browser module would install, all three of my browsers ( Edge, FF, Chrome) would freeze and not install the module.
That's all I've discovered so far, but it was just enough for me.
Plus the usual Norton bullying purchase policy.

Norton does really good in tests and seems like Norton is slightly lighter with Avast engine too and Norton did make the ui less annoying then what it was

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

Not really considering it uses avast web blocking. I would still keep Norton extension it's good for identifying bad pages. Avast might have top tier malware detection and pretty much keep your system safe from malware infections BUT the phishing protection is really not the best...

Many solutions from free security feeds you can add to free home firewalls like sophos / open source alternatives to extensions that some have higher capabilities and are free as well
(Firewall wouldn't cause a performance impact since the intelligence and computing is done on your hardware firewall and extensions would cause a temporally add a few tens of milliseconds CPU time increase when you load a site and would stop when it's loaded as well as a few tens of megabytes of ram till the page fully loads and I will call it light and I'm running 3 light extensions in a 2gb laptop without feeling much of an increase in website loading

 

[ttto]

Just updated to Avasted Norton yesterday. No far issues, working good just tick logo pixeled, but I supposed is a bug. In an old w8 computer tick is correct.

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

Just updated to Avasted Norton yesterday. No far issues, working good just tick logo pixeled, but I supposed is a bug. In an old w8 computer tick is correct.
View attachment 285969

If anyone wants in the future to confirm it still uses Symantec technology can test this page Test Rating for some reason it doesn't get blocked on my end with Norton safe web but for others it does


For other categories Symantec Sitereview

Note it's a possibility Norton has reduced protection without a product installed as at least for me without a Norton products it blocks less pishing sites then Symantec browser protection and doesn't pass the test rating

 

[Sorrento]

I wonder what the privacy is is like as Avast are not known for privacy??

 

[tofargone]

I ask because I am having trouble installing Norton Safe Web. If it is not necessary for proper web protection, I will skip it.
I do not unnecessarily load my web browser.

Yea I only use a few extensions. See Photo

 

[Junho]

If anyone wants in the future to confirm it still uses Symantec technology can test this page Test Rating for some reason it doesn't get blocked on my end with Norton safe web but for others it does


For other categories Symantec Sitereview

Note it's a possibility Norton has reduced protection without a product installed as at least for me without a Norton products it blocks less pishing sites then Symantec browser protection and doesn't pass the test rating

I got the new norton v24 with safe web installed and confirmed it does blocked this test page:

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

I got the new norton v24 with safe web installed and confirmed it does blocked this test page:
View attachment 286053

View attachment 286054

Interesting without a Norton product installed and only this extension Norton Safe Web - Chrome Web Store
It didn't get blocked so maybe it's important to have a Norton product installed
But Symantec extension does work without any product installed