Comments on: Symantec's Ramzan on solving the antivirus puzzle

q&a From puzzles and chess to ciphers and antivirus software, Zulfikar Ramzan talks about how he got into the computer security business and where it's headed.

[BlitzBoy1120]

I've always liked the protection Norton Anti-Virus had, but it slowed down my computer a lot, especially at startup.

[Mr. Dee]

Running Symantec EndPoint 11 and the RTVScan.exe process just slows down everything on loading the Desktop. I have to wait at least a good 5 to 10 minutes before I can start using my computer productively.

[cp256]

I haven't been a fan of NAV or Norton at large since it left DOS for the desktop. After far too many failed installs and customer complaints I just gave up. I had many of the same problems with MacAfee afterward. Had some almost bad experiences with a few gremlins sneaking by Trend too. Tried a number of other AV solutions and settled on Avast, which which I have been very happy for the past 5 or so years. Their free Home Edition works well right out of the box and I have heard nothing but good things from my customers who have switched to it. On my unix servers I use ClamAV. I love Open Source projects most of the time.

[Mr. Dee]

AVAST is atrocious, it couldn't scan its way out of a paper bag. Too many false positives and lacks proper user experience. Its one thing you have to give Symantec credit for, user experience, easy to setup and use. I like Microsoft's Security Essentials too, I hope its a good product whens finalized so I can replace EndPoint. EndPoint does an excellent job at finding malicious code, but is awkward when it comes to quarantining or removing from the system.

[Jack K1]

Way to pitch softball questions! Are you two "dating" or something?

[Mr. Dee]

Secret lovers, yeah, that's what we are, trying so hard to hide the way we feel,

[dburr13]

I think Norton has made some great strides in the last couple years toward correcting problems that had given them a rep as a resource hog...One of their biggest challenges is to get people to try them again...Back in the day Norton programs really did suck the life out of your machine...but now they are the lightest in resource consumption of those i have tried...But you still have people who used Norton back in the day saying Norton is a resource hog like it's some kind of mantra...It doesn't sound so wise to those of us who have taken the time to try their latest programs...Of course being faster now is not the end of the story...I try out the latest programs from other companies too...Next year i might be using something else.

[Mr. Dee]

I was gonna say trying requires buying, then I remembered they have trial versions. I am personally satisfied with EndPoint which I believe the retail versions are based on too. But personally, I moving towards free these days, with MSE from MS a free solution, it sounds like a real show stopper based on the reviews and my personal experience.

[kenberger]

Why doesn't any "journalist" ask / pressure the "security" people what role they play in growing the threats and fear. Having abandoned Windows the last few years due to virus problems for the Mac, I find it interesting that the security companies are the ones yelling about virus and demonstrating them - even though there are no reports of anyone have problems on a Mac with one.

What role does the security industry play in making computers have problems so they can sell (and make a lot of money) solutions?

[monkeyfun14]

Malware exists on the Mac

[getwired]

monkeyfun14 - not much, and most of it requires some pretty ignorant behavior on the part of the user downloading, installing, and approving it. It takes a lot more work to compromise a Mac with any current malware in the wild.

[monkeyfun14]

@getwired

Its easy to be ignorant when your preached to that your machine is the most secure thing ever.
You'll fine few viruses if any for Vista as well that work with UAC turned on.

[getwired]

monkeyfun14 - your own naiveté is showing. UAC does nothing to protect a Windows user - it only protects them from infecting the whole system. It's quite possible to install a keystroke logger with UAC running. UAC is NOT a security boundary (read and learn): http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=175

The Mac derives its core internals from Mach and BSD. The latter having security fundamentals integrated into it. Windows has been playing security catch-up to UNIX for decades. Sorry, but it's true.

[jaguar717]

"most of it requires some pretty ignorant behavior on the part of the user downloading, installing, and approving it"

So as long as you don't download or install anything, you're safe! (How does that differ from a Windows, or Linux or Unix, system again?)

Or is the defense supposed to be that between Mac users and the selection out there, we don't really need to worry about that happening?

[getwired]

Jaguar717 - the ability for drive-by downloads to infect a Windows system is considerably easier, even with UAC, than a Mac. It's true.

[gertruded]

Nowhere in the article does it say that he is working with Windows machines, when he is.

The best virus protection today is another operating system while on line.

He isn't the only one with a MIT degree, but it doesn't take much to know that.

[monkeyfun14]

Malware exists on the Mac

[gertruded]

The MS gorilla marketers are at it again. Malware for mac, a couple not in the wild, malware for Windows in the thousands and thousands.

[Lerianis3]

Antivirus is always going to be necessary until computer manufacturers tighten their restrictions and realize that certain things should ONLY be done with user permission.

Those things are:
1. Accessing the registry.
2. Installation programs for run on startup (which no program should do AUTOMATICALLY, you should have to give permission after running it the first time).
3. Running installation programs IN GENERAL.
4. Installing 'kernel hooks'.
5. Installing drivers without user permission and ONLY if they are signed or the user gives SPECIFIC PERMISSION to install non-signed drivers.

Those are the 5 or 6 I can think of right now that NO program should be allowed to do. There are others, and I would invite people to add to my list.

To gertruded.... yeah, the major operating system that is on 90% of computers IS going to have the bleeping bulk of viruses! That does NOT point to any failure by Microsoft, because it would have happened to..... LINUX AND MAC (sing this with me!) if they were the dominant OS or OS's.

[gertruded]

Nonsense about Mac and Linux. They are more secure. But that argument is really not relevant here. You and I, sitting here today, are just not going to get or have to worry about viruses or malware if we switch to Ubuntu for our online activities. Not for OSX either.

So install Ubuntu dual boot or over Windows and try, you will be amazed at how much more secure you will feel and actually be. It is easy to do. Linux has come a long way. OSX is better, but that is for your next computer.

[Seaspray0]

@gertruded. Linux and OSX have lead the last 3 years as having the most vulnerabilities compared to vista. Get with the times, rip van winkle. Windows is no longer the swiss cheese it used to be. These are the facts.

[frontier2002]

This sound surprise i never knew that the guy behind symantec is not a real white man :). Is he indians or something