Newsmaker: Symantec CEO says no Vista for me

newsmaker Coming off a good quarter for Symantec's consumer businesses, CEO John Thompson warns against viewing Windows Vista as a solution to security woes.

Symantec ended 2006 with three months in which revenue for its consumer business grew 24 percent year over year. The company is planning to release its new flagship security tool, Norton 360, in the coming weeks and has a new identity management product, Norton Identity Manager, lined up as well.

On the enterprise side the news isn't that rosy. Symantec has also revisited its plans to enter the identity management space and ceded to the many players already on the market. Identity management software identifies users of a system and controls their access to resources by associating rights and restrictions with a particular identity.

There are vultures in the sky over Symantec. Along with Microsoft, technology giants including EMC, IBM, Oracle and Cisco Systems are eying parts of Symantec's business. Thompson, however, in a recent interview with CNET News.com, said his company is fearless, though it may need to execute better on its strategies.

Q: Have you installed Vista?
Thompson: No, I have not. I see no need for it for what I do online today. The machine that I use is the one provided by our company, and we have not made a commitment to migrate to Vista and therefore there is no reason for me to use Vista.

Microsoft says you have to buy Vista because it makes you much safer online than XP, or any of its previous operating systems. Do you believe that?
Thompson: Consumers should not be confused. Vista is not a security solution. Vista is an operating system, and Vista provides some very important advances from Microsoft's perspective and for the industry's point of view on building a more stable, more reliable, more secure operating platform, but people still need the efficacy that comes with the products that Symantec and others in the industry build, and so we should not be confused by the marketing rhetoric with what Vista is. It's a hopefully much better product than XP or any of its predecessors, but it's not a security solution.

Video: Symantec CEO: 'Vista not a security solution'
John Thompson on the new operating system

Antivirus and firewall products, which you sell--they're considered a first line of defense, but they're also considered outdated. Are you keeping up with the times?
Thompson: It would be naive to say they're outdated. Locks were invented for doors in the homes that we live in many, many years ago. They're no longer the last line of defense, they are the first line of defense, and people still buy more advanced locks, hence more antivirus, more firewalls. As the value of the assets that you have in the physical world goes up, so does the need to change the protection that you put around those devices, or those assets. And that is clearly the case in the digital world as well, and so antivirus and firewalls will continue to be the first line of defense. We'll have to be smarter about delivering new capabilities and new functions there for proactive defense as opposed to reactive defense, but you'll also have to layer other kinds of technologies on to deal with new threats around fraud and identity management and all of those.

More Newsmakers

[mrstwin2]

Failure of Symantic

Mr. Thompson's comment "Consumers should not be confused. Vista is not a security solution. Vista is an operating system, and Vista provides some very important advances from Microsoft's perspective and for the industry's point of view on building a more stable, more reliable, more secure operating platform, but people still need the efficacy that comes with the products that Symantec and others in the industry build, and so we should not be confused by the marketing rhetoric with what Vista is. It's a hopefully much better product than XP or any of it's predecessors, but it's not a security solution." shows the ignorance that Symantic has been showing the last few years. I find that Symantic products are bloated and require way too much overhead from the computer. By switching to MS One Care, I get the same protection but with 75% less overhead.

I don't think that Mr. Thompson really cares about Vista, only selling his product and him coming out against upgrading to Vista shows that Symantic has a very narrow vision and cannot be trusted to secure computers in the future. This can be seen on their own website where they have a Vista upgrade. I think that Mr. Thompson is being dishonest in telling people not to upgrade but then selling the upgrade on his own website.

[dondarko]

see

I gave up on Symantec years ago and I have been using Avast Home Edition, which is free by the way, for 4 years now. It catches stuff that Norton neglected while I still had it and it catches stuff like candy. Symantec, McAfee and other products are bloated and don't offer much protection. Luckily there are other choices such as Avast and Kaspersky.

[Silver_2000]

Have to remove Norton all the time - broken - bloated

I have had to remove Norton from 80+% percent of PCs it?s installed on. It slows them down tremendously; it has a tendency to block ports and access with NO notifications. And the uninstall is broken so you have to use the online tools to rip it out.

Its a bad sign when the software is written so poorly that it slows the PC by 50%, its broken on BRAND new PCs that its preinstalled on and the uninstall is so broken that they have dozens of support articles about how to remove their product.

And we haven't even covered the dozens of failures described in articles here on CNet - the times when Norton Antivirus executed the virus it was supposed to clean etc etc

http://news.com.com/Flaw+found+in+Symantec+business+antivirus+software/2100-1002_3-6077616.html?tag=nefd.top

"Versions of Symantec's antivirus business security software contain a flaw that could put millions of computers at risk of a crippling worm attack, Internet experts warned on Friday.

December 21 2005

From http://news.com.com/High+risk+in+Symantec+antivirus+software+flaw/2100-1002_3-6004097.html?tag=nefd.top

Symantec's antivirus software contains a vulnerability that could be exploited by a malicious hacker to take control of a system, the company said late Tuesday.

September 1 2005

From http://news.com.com/Symantec+probes+report+of+antivirus+product+flaw/2100-1002_3-5845873.html

Symantec is investigating a report of a weakness in the way its corporate antivirus software stores login credentials, the security vendor said on Wednesday.

August 15 2005

From http://news.com.com/Another+flaw+hits+Veritas+backup+tools/2100-7349_3-5833857.html

( Symantec owns Veritas )

A security vulnerability in Veritas backup products could put corporate networks at risk of cyberattack.

By exploiting the flaw, an attacker could get remote access and download arbitrary files, the software maker said in an advisory released on Friday. Symantec last month closed its acquisition of Veritas.

June 30th 2005

From http://news.com.com/Attackers+target+Veritas+security+hole/2100-7349_3-5770428.html

( Symantec owns Veritas )

A security flaw in a Veritas Software backup tool is being exploited to attack corporate systems, the U.S. watchdog for Internet threats has warned.

March 30 2005

From http://news.com.com/Symantec+details+flaws+in+its+antivirus+software/2100-1002_3-5646871.html

Symantec has reported glitches in its antivirus software that could allow hackers to launch denial-of-service attacks on computers running the applications.

Feb 10 2005

From http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/0,2000061744,39180674,00.htm

Symantec has issued a patch for a flaw in its scanning software that could cause a virus to run, rather than catch it.

Jan 13 2004

http://news.com.com/Symantec+slams+the+door+on+LiveUpdate+flaw/2100-1029_3-5140165.html

Security company Symantec, developer of the popular Norton AntiVirus software, fixed a problem in its LiveUpdate feature last week--a vulnerability that could allow malicious users to gain unauthorized administrator access rights to an affected PC.

Not the kind of record I want to see from MY Security company

And finally the link to the a Symantec uninstall that lists the manual uninstall for nearly 30 of their products
http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/ent-security.nsf/ppfdocs/2004040815371048

Do any of the Norton Uninstalls work ??

[rapier1]

Biased much?

Maybe he isn't in a rush to upgrade because symantec doesn't
have a Vista product yet. I am *sure* once he has a Vista product
he'll be shouting from the rooftops how everyone should switch.

As far as security goes. If you aren't an idiot you *won't* have
problems. The biggest problem are people installing
*everything* that comes at them. "Oh this web site I've never bee
to and is trying to sell me ***** enhancement pills wants me to
install something? OK! Lets do it!"

Fools.

[bettencourtt]

Remember, folks, they WANTED a weaker OS

Remember when they, along with McAfee, wanted MS to WEAKEN it's security features? They wanted the ability to turn off whatever security features they wanted programmatically. (Which would also allow a virus to, as well, thus, justifying their continued existence.)

Maybe he refuses to upgrade because he knows he can't just call the MS Firewall and Security Center "redundant" and turn it off WITHOUT your permission, all the while insisting that MS needs to give consumers a "choice." Boo hoo, hoo.

Maybe they ought to fix their own product before trashing someone else's.

I'm an IT pro, have been several years, and I love Vista. It's a bit bloated, admittedly, but I like User Account Control. I like that I am ASKED when something wants to install or run itself, or change my settings, etc, etc. Let me decide. Heck, this will eliminate a large contingent of viruses and spyware that are installed without permission. Oh, no, less justification for Symantec, right?

[unknown unknown]

Symmantec's products are terrible

Norton Internet Security is bloated, intrusive, and cause more problems than it fixes. In an effort to justify it's existance it continually annoys you with alerts. With the exception of 2003 copy of Norton Ghost I've given up on their products.
Despite his claims of experience and investment there are much better and cheaper products out there that don't slow your system down and bother you with trivial junk every 10 seconds. Since they aquired the Norton suite, it's gone down hill with every release.

Microsoft's One Care despite a few bugs is immensely superior to Symmantec's product. Right now I am using NOD32, which is better than both IMO.

[qwerty75]

If MS wasn' dog crap

Then companies like Symantec wouldn't exist in the first place.

That an OS in 2007 still needs anti-virus and anti-spyware is shameful.

[Razzl]

Revealing where the flaws lie

It's acceptable for a home user to say that they aren't using Vista because XP works fine for them, but totally unacceptable for the CEO of a company whose sole purpose is to provide software security products which will run as accessories to the OS. If I were in his position I would want to know intimately how Vista behaves and get to know it very well down to the last detail; I would have my desktop running XP and Vista on the same machine so I can compare their behavior on demand. Lack of intellectual curiousity is a form of blindness that cripples every enterprise infected with it.

Lack of intellectual curiousity may explain why he seems not to be able to accurately describe just what the nature of the security issues are for his market and how to address them. People are not having difficulties with online verification of their own identities, which is done by the host software and doesn't involve their client software; what they are having trouble with is judging the validity of the sites they have accessed. Since Microsoft has built antiphishing evaluation into the browser, virus detection and firewalling should remain Norton's core concern. Neither Norton nor Microsoft is ever going to achieve the holy grail of big subscription dollars for services people believe should come built into their initial investment, no matter how worried they profess to be about security...

[Shutter01]

Symantec, uh, no more

These comments from Symantec managent/leadership are totally consistent with the awful customer and product performance service I've had from Symantec. Oh, and by the way, Kaspersky works so much better than NAV.

[Andrew Sutherland]

Let me think about this for 1.2 seconds

Hmm. CEO of Symantec, says (and I quote):

"but people still need the efficacy that comes with the products that Symantec and others in the industry build"

Of COURSE he's against promoting Vista. If Vista is 1% more secure than XP, that means he could lose business from people not buying the bloated crap they call an A/V.

Common - look at the context here. If Vista meant it was less secure and you'd HAVE to buy an A/V, then I'm sure he'd be very supportive of it.




SIGH

[graupma]

misguided security

Microsoft and Symantec should take a look in the mirror and start addressing the problem where it starts.
On the internet itself.
ANY intrusion from outside the U.S. should have to go through rigorous tests before being allowed in to travel to any website; business or personal computer, etc.

I recognise that to be profitable, companies in the security field feel that its important to develop personal and business software to protect them. What this is duplicates itself millions of times, when ONE EFFORT by these companies and our government could solve the problem.

I use NORTON software, only because it has caught numerous attacks on my computers. It is also the quickest and most reliable system I use to stop spam, and e-mail attacks.

Price is no object when my security is at stake.
All you need is to have your computer system invaded by terrorists or spammers or identity thieves, and it is so devastating, that you never let it happen again.
Thank my lucky stars that I have backup software, as this has happened to me in the past.


alg
los angeles

[Heebee Jeebies]

How come they...

Never ask the people at Symantec why Norton's products suck. Why Norton Anti-Virus is so slow to scan hard drives, why it sucks the life and resources out of our PC's. Why each upgrade is nothing more than a new year date, new interface and so little else. Why Norton didn't catch 10 viruses on my system but PC-Cillin, Kaspersky and ohters did. Why one of those viruses was able to de-activate Norton so that it wouldn't even work and their tech support people couldn't fix it so I could re-activate it and remove the virus.

Why don't these news people actually ask the hard questions instead of playing footsies with them. Why?

Robert

[bobby_brady]

Symantec = Bloatware

I haven't used Symantec products in a while. XP SP2 and esp Vista are secure enough without having to add Symantec bloatware. These programs slow my computer down to a crawl. They're a joke. Of course the Symantec idiots want you to believe you still need their bloated programs.

[OneWithTech]

How Funny Is This?

A top official at Symantec not upgrading to Vista! Yet the very company He works for creates security software for Microsoft OS's extensively for many years now.

So with his mindset of the insecurities of Microsoft frome Symantecs top guy; combined with his own companies insecurities; maybe an Apple Network is in need for my clients companies?

Something every great IT manager should be thinking of.....how much will it cost me to convert my Network to Apple based products. You know, products that are secure with a company known for it's analistic approach to security and technology.

Imaging knowing that your company is being protected every day and every night and not securing it's spotlight on how INSECURE it [Microsoft OS's as well as Symantec] is on CNET NEWS.

www.Apple.com

See what Steve can do for YOU!

Justin
Tech01.net

[Stating]

MS Pushing Vista Down People's Throats

Regardless of what you think about Symantec, there isn't really much freedom from MS now that they are pushing their bloated Vista OS on consumers. A lot of folks like myself would prefer to buy new computers with XP rather than Vista given it's smaller memory/disk footprint, but have little choice now. I use 3rd party security tools on XP and it is plenty secure. Heck, even Widnows 2000 is still a decent, useable product, and it runs even faster, with a smaller footprint than XP does.

[Sir Limey]

Querty

Would be nice if some people could conduct a discussion without resorting to vulgarity (for Querty that means swearing!)
PS I just finished downloading the latest security patches for my Powerbook did you??
If you can learn to cut the abuse and respond with some logic people may listen. Instead you come across as another MAC/LINUX fanatic that makes it impossible for others to state a valid point.

[mxrss]

God this is the problem with the net

you have linux nerds, spreading fud i use linux i like linux for servers, and PBX's. thats it. Linux has a few locks and doors built into the system SELinux anyone, or how about user control that has been installed into unix for years, anyone or anything can trash a system so long as you give it the permissions to do it. What zealot nerds have to realize that not everyone has the time to use, to figure out how to use some of the programs for linux. While admitedly it has gotten easier it is far from being seamless.

- mike

[Renegade Knight]

Impressive Corporate Speak

Reading that interview reminds me of what most companies say before they trip up and have major problem.

While I'm not a fan of MS in general they actually make products that work. Where I've bough them they earned my business.

Symantec on the other hand, lost me as a customer for a few key reasons. First, I've paid money for software that they won't authorize. Thus I have nothing for my money. That was just the last straw. That same software (Utilities and Internet Security) has less and less features with each generation. It's harder to use with each generation. It's more bloated and less stable with each generation. I have to re-boot my laptop due to Symantec crashes more than XP issues.

Over the three years that I was becoming disenchanged with Symantec (a company that I used to love) I sent several emails detailing my concerns. They did hear from me. They just chose not to respond.

I'll buy vista before I buy Symantec. Simple as that.

[Sniche]

Your've running around in the dark Mate

Get your head out of your ass and visit a few Apple Web Sites, there
may-be a light at the end of the tunnel , Cheers

[Sumatra-Bosch]

VISTAPOCALYPSE !

TO be followed shortly by the Symantepocalypse.



Roberto