Re: Mcafee or Norton

"Craig Davies" <c.j.davies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:dsdgtl$1vo$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Which is the better option out of the two:
Norton Internet Security 2006
Mcafee 8 Internet Security Suite 2006

In terms of its user-friendly useage? Any problems you have experienced with
either them etc Also if you have both which did you prefer and why

I want to get one and i aint sure which one.


Most that complain about one or both being resource hogs haven't a clue that they can install those products without including every component within (i.e., just say no to all the fluff). Most refer to the suite of tools rather than focus on one particular component, like the anti-virus component of which you ask (and even then you can reduce overhead, like not bothering with e-mail scanning). There are leaner products but most don't have the same level of coverage (although KAV beats them alas I haven't info on how many processes it runs and how much memory they consume).

It's been a year, or more, since I used Norton AntiVirus (and JUST that product separate of their suite). Even if you install their suite, consider if you need, for example, their Parental Control component which loads a large table into memory (so it bloats) and will slow IE a bit to interrogate the table on every access, including those within a page. A file server or other enterprise node probably should not be running an AV program at all, or use an enterprise solution and not some personal desktop product.

I have found McAfee, in the past, to be too intrusive in that it will do background scans of updated files despite that I am using the host (i.e., it won't shutup when I'm busy) plus their enterprise product pushes updates while I am busy. Their desktop product isn't any worse than Norton and no worse than the freebies that I've tried (AVG, EzAntivirus, AntiVir, etc.). However, there are 2 problems which I consider major that made me abandon the product:

- Their locally executed web applications (that they use for their interface) are ran under the Internet security zone. ActiveX control upon which they rely may not run if you have configured the Internet security zone to Prompt for running and scripting of AX controls and plug-ins. Their window is not a full-blown browser so you don't get a prompt. Since you cannot answer a prompt that doesn't appear, their AX control won't run and you get a bitch message from them saying to lower the security level of your Internet security zone. In other words, you have to reduce security to use their security product. It is amazing that no one at McAfee knows how to code HTAs (HTML Applications) which provide for executing local web applications but under the My Computer security zone, including any objects called within the HTA, like AX controls. There is a registry hack where you can define the "mcp://" protocol that appears unique for use by McAfee which is a workaround but I only tested it for about a week.

- Automatic updates won't work unless you login once to their web site AND you save their cookie. I don't save cookies except for whitelisted domains, and I don't whitelist McAfee's domain. Any product that updates itself shouldn't need a cookie because it is not a secure method of authenticating a user (i.e., to validate that they have an account) and it is suspectible to deletion due to cleanup on the user's host. There is no point in securing the updates, anyway, since they are of no value except to users of their products.

So unless you want to degrade your Internet security zone (to its Medium setting) and unless you keep their cookie, their windows to their interface won't work and you won't get automatic updates. The workarounds would be to define the mcp:// protocol that McAfee uses to run their local web applications and to keep their cookie around. I like their core product but their UI implementation sucks (well, for me, I refuse to lower security to use their product). Symantec had problems running local web apps, too, but I believe those disappeared about version 2002.

Just be sure how much bloat you want to install. Use the custom install to select just the AV product if that is all you want, and then configure NAV to only enable what features you want. You'll probably want to disable e-mail scanning, but that is not just a problem with NAV but with all AV products (NAV, at least, for inbound mails, has an option to send a bogus X-header to the e-mail client to try to keep it from timing out). You only mention Norton Antivirus and McAfee VirusScan but often users are actually asking about the entire suite, much of which is fluff. I wasn't impressed with, for example, Norton Anti-Spam, and instead use SpamPal which is free but, hey, something is better than nothing unless you are one of the lucky few that never get spammed.

You never mentioned WHICH component of each suite for which you wanted information. As for their firewalls, I found Norton's firewall to give me better control and information. However, Sygate's Personal Firewall Pro is better than Norton. Alas, Symantec bought Sygate and then promptly discarded the firewall to deliberately eliminate a competitor. Although I use the Pro version, the non-Pro version (which doesn't require a product key) can still be found for download, and I like it better than Norton's firewall (which I like better than McAfee's which is mostly a fluff interface and you can't even watch the traffic as it occurs to see the connections). Sygate provides IDS (intrusion detection system) even in the non-Pro free version but since Symantec killed the product means those signatures don't get updated. To supplant that loss of IDS in the Sygate firewall (Pro or non-Pro), I use Prevx1 R ("research" version is free). You could even use Prevx1 by itself as it detects viruses, spyware, trojans, and other malware but it cooperates with anti-virus and firewall products. I don't like the minimal firewall-like application rules in Prevx1 (which only apply against unknown apps) so I still use a 3rd party firewall. Prevx is planning to add a firewall later. However, Prevx isn't for the boob because it will popup prompts asking you what to allow, so you'll have to understand the prompt (and answering Yes or Allow to every prompt defeats the security so you might as not bother with that product).

Few anti-virus and firewall products actually protect themselves from getting killed or suspended by malware (if it manages to get under your radar and still run on your host). Sygate's firewall (Pro and freebie) tries some to protect itself but isn't kill-proof. Prevx should help to discover any malware that runs and pend any action it attempts awaiting your response to Allow or Block (so it comes back to you to understand the prompt). ProcessGuard regulates what can load into memory and what actions it can commit on other processes. The freebie version should be good enough but it doesn't block every possible method of killing a process, especially if there is a UI for the process. However, like Prevx, you will be innundated with prompts at first asking if you want to allow a program to run (but it does have a Learn mode but which should be used after you have thoroughly confirmed your host is clean). I still use Prevx1 but ProcessGuard was becoming just too much hassle for me, and I consider having a firewall, IDS, and anti-virus programs as sufficient and ProcessGuard a bit overkill.

So while you are considering a choice between McAfee and Norton, you might want to look into freebie alternatives of which I'd recommend finding a download of Sygate's personal firewall (http://www.simtel.com/product.download.mirrors.php?id=53687) and CA's EzAntivirus (http://www.my-etrust.com/microsoft). Then consider if you want to add Prevx1 and/or ProcessGuard to the mix. And the cost? Zero!

--
__________________________________________________
Post replies to the newsgroup. Share with others.
For e-mail: Remove "NIX" and add "#VN" to Subject.
__________________________________________________

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Keeping my pc safe
    ... security solution by using different free products. ... Panda which is a far superior paid solution and a far better one than Norton. ... I do not have a great deal of information of McAfee, ... yet the firewall ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin)
  • Re: Anti Virus Software
    ... I used, and recommended, Norton Antivirus and then Norton Internet ... Security, for many years, on Win98, WinNT, Win2K, and WinXP, all without ... I had used McAfee prior to that. ... anti-virus product is AVAST! ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: choosing firewall and antivirus: Norton or McAfee ?Something else
    ... McAfee is notorious for screwing up Outlook Express and Norton puts too many hooks into the operating system and is a terrible resource hog. ... criteria for choosing a good firewall and a good antivirus program? ... stealthed the stealth option of little value? ...
    (microsoft.public.security)
  • Re: Norton Personal Firewall 2004 problem
    ... > With the Norton Personal Firewall engaged, I cannot get any web pages ... it has the anti virus stuff and it has the Security stuff). ... I've tried a few different toggles in the Norton Firewall. ... If the customer is required to know ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
  • Re: Asking about anti-virus programs
    ... I believe I have enabled the one that came with McAfee, ... because "Microsoft Windows Update" flagged it. ... than my firewall is enabled. ... There are also security updates for Office at ...
    (microsoft.public.security)