Norton 360 not recognized as Malware Protection

--
Sadie


"Charlie42" wrote:

> "Sadie" <Sadie@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> > Appreciate your reply. With my tech skills, I will leave as is for now;
> > hopefully Norton 360 will improve eventually. Had difficult time removing
> > Norton Internet Security 2007 to install Norton 360; mission accomplished
> > & pleased. All things will never be perfect!
>
> I can not help myself (rant of the day follows): Not with Symantec products
> anyway. Norton really is not the best security software around, it is also
> has a huge footprint and comes jam packed with bloatware few need. Next time
> your subscription is up for renewal, you should honestly consider obtaining
> a different solution. (Rant finished.)
>
> Search this group for "best anti virus", "best anti spyware", "best
> security" an so on, and you will find good recommendations. What you need is
> an anti virus, an additional anti spyware (you already have Windows
> Defender) and a firewall (the built in Windows Firewall serves most home
> user's needs just fine). Enable your router firewall if you have one, it
> makes an excellent first line of defense, and educate yourself on online
> do's and don'ts.
>
> Microsoft Security at Home:
> http://www.microsoft.com/protect/default.mspx
>
> I am sorry my previous post appeared a wee bit too technical, command line
> work can be a bit advanced. If your problems persist, you should take your
> computer to a professional and have him or her take a look at it.
>
> As for removing Norton products, Symantec offers a removal tool. Perhaps you
> are already aware of it. You may have to run it 2-3 times in order to to
> wipe out your system properly, sadly even then Norton may leave residue
> behind.
>
> Norton Removal Tool:
> http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT...05033108162039
>
> Charlie42
>
> THANKS! Will pursue when N360 expires. Also well aware of the Norton Removal Tools needing to be run several times.

Don't wait until N360 expires. It's foolish to do so if it's causing
problems.

Replace Norton with the free AVG http://free.grisoft.com/ or Avast
http://www.avast.com/eng/avast_4_home.html, and Windows Firewall and Windows
Defender. Disabling Norton is not enough. You need to completely uninstall
it. If it doesn't solve the problem, get rid of Norton anyway. Norton is
known to cause many problems in Vista and they don’t always appear
immediately.
Download and run the Norton Removal Tool.
http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT...05033108162039

"Sadie" <Sadie@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F9DC907E-925F-4DDF-A1D3-78DD86CBF93C@microsoft.com...
>
> --
> Sadie
>
>
> "Charlie42" wrote:
>
>> "Sadie" <Sadie@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Appreciate your reply. With my tech skills, I will leave as is for
>> > now;
>> > hopefully Norton 360 will improve eventually. Had difficult time
>> > removing
>> > Norton Internet Security 2007 to install Norton 360; mission
>> > accomplished
>> > & pleased. All things will never be perfect!
>>
>> I can not help myself (rant of the day follows): Not with Symantec
>> products
>> anyway. Norton really is not the best security software around, it is
>> also
>> has a huge footprint and comes jam packed with bloatware few need. Next
>> time
>> your subscription is up for renewal, you should honestly consider
>> obtaining
>> a different solution. (Rant finished.)
>>
>> Search this group for "best anti virus", "best anti spyware", "best
>> security" an so on, and you will find good recommendations. What you need
>> is
>> an anti virus, an additional anti spyware (you already have Windows
>> Defender) and a firewall (the built in Windows Firewall serves most home
>> user's needs just fine). Enable your router firewall if you have one, it
>> makes an excellent first line of defense, and educate yourself on online
>> do's and don'ts.
>>
>> Microsoft Security at Home:
>> http://www.microsoft.com/protect/default.mspx
>>
>> I am sorry my previous post appeared a wee bit too technical, command
>> line
>> work can be a bit advanced. If your problems persist, you should take
>> your
>> computer to a professional and have him or her take a look at it.
>>
>> As for removing Norton products, Symantec offers a removal tool. Perhaps
>> you
>> are already aware of it. You may have to run it 2-3 times in order to to
>> wipe out your system properly, sadly even then Norton may leave residue
>> behind.
>>
>> Norton Removal Tool:
>> http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT...05033108162039
>>
>> Charlie42
>>
>> THANKS! Will pursue when N360 expires. Also well aware of the Norton
>> Removal Tools needing to be run several times.

"Bob" <nowhere@nowhere.net> wrote:

> Don't wait until N360 expires. It's foolish to do so if it's causing
> problems

Norton is not causing her problems, it is just not integrating with the
Security Center. This is an error that occasionally occurs with many
different AV's, due to repository issues. It is a problem with Vista.

Charlie42

Could someone give me some plain language help please? When I bought Norton
360, I thought it would replace the Windows defender series and that this
would be a good thing to do. Clearly some people do not rate Norton, so would
it be best for me to:

1) Use Windows Defender only, for firewall, anti-virus etc etc, or 2) Use
Norton for anti-virus and windows for everything else? or 3) Find another
anti-virus and use it alongside Windows Defender for everything else? Should
I then also discard the other packages I have bought, including my registry
organiser and the ant-Spyware package. There is so much stuff on the market,
some guidance on an effective line-up would be great. Thank you.

"SG" wrote:

> >>>I never suggested to use ERUNT<<<
>
> Nope you didn't and I missed that, my apologies.
>
> >>>Based on what...your thinking? You've got to be kidding!<<<
>
> Well lets see here Kayman, maybe I should have said something besides
> "THINK" and suggested after my 18 some years with computer experience, would
> that suite you better?
>
> >>>(but *I* use both utilities without any problems)<<<
>
> So, because you didn't have problems that makes these two programs SAFE?,
> you got to be kidding :>). I wasn't after you Kayman for what you posted,
> not sure why, but it seems to me you took this personally and that's not the
> case at all. When I see these snake oil programs and that's all they are, I
> simply point out they are dangerous. It's been debated for years and
> probably always will be about compacting the registry and in my professional
> opinion it doesn't amount to a grain of salt. Do some of these programs
> really work? I'm sure some do and I know in Win98 Scanreg /Fix and Opt did
> indeed reduce the size of the Registry. The question was, is it noticeable
> enough for the user to tell and in many test done by me and many others
> years was no. BTW, in Win98 and WinMe if the Registry contain more than 500
> KB of empty data blocks, Windows Registry Checker automatically optimized
> it.
>
> When I see things like:
> "You may want to disable the tracker to avoid this message in the future
> (see the Windows help for information on how to do this)" this is referring
> to the NTREGOPT sometimes fails with error 1450.
>
> Right, now lets turn off Tracker so we can run his program without the error
> not really knowing what other problems this my cause the user and if it did
> no one would know what or where this new error may be coming from.
>
>
> " To make sure the programs are executed with proper administrative
> privileges, you should however turn off User Account Control in Vista's
> system settings "
>
> Nothing at all about turning off UAC and the dangers this can cause, for
> example, the problem lies when turning off UAC after Vista has been used for
> a while with UAC turned on. Vista intercepts any file operations that
> attempts to write to a Program Files directory for a specific app, like when
> a program tries to create a saved file for example. These files are
> virtualized to a special Program Data folder instead. If you save a file and
> then turn off UAC, virtualization is also turned off. So then the program
> can not find the saved file. This can also happen with anything else the
> application tries to store in its program files directory. You can Google
> "dangers turning off UAC" and find many reasons NOT to turn it off. I find
> it amazing the author suggest totally disabling one of the best security
> features ever in windows only to compact the Registry that supposedly speeds
> up the system. WOW what a trade off, lets all get infected with Spyware,
> Trojans and Viruses, but not to worry, with our Registry compacted it will
> make getting rid of these pest much faster.
>
>
> "Should I disable Windows XP's System Restore function when using ERUNT?
> Yes! Though System Restore backs up more than just the registry, the
> registry is essentially all you need to revert your system to a previous
> state."
>
> Now you ask me if I was kidding and you should have ask the author. Disable
> XP's System Restore for what? to save a little hard drive space? man this is
> unbelievable. He says the registry is essentially all you need to revert
> your system to a previous state. Humm, well I guess MS screwed up when they
> added all the other features that go along with System Restore eh? Hard
> Drive space is just about a thing of the past and as cheap as they are now
> no one should be to worried about space. DVD's, CD Writers, Memory Cards and
> 8 Gig pocket drives at Wal-Mart for $79.00, USB to IDE/SATA cables drives
> makes it easy for more than enough backup space.
>
> Well enough said and again I do apologize if I worded my post to the extent
> if offended you, it surely wasn't meant to be that way. You can have the
> last word as I will be moving on and sorry to the OP for high-jacking this
> thread.
>
>
> --
> All the best,
> SG
>
> ALEX NICHOL
> (1935-2005)
> http://www.aumha.org/alex.htm
> You will never be forgotten my friend
>
> "Kayman" <kaymanDeleteThis@operamail.com> wrote in message
> news:ea4FW7yeIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
>

What do you mean by "registry organiser"?

Do you mean "registry cleaner"?

DO NOT use registry cleaners! See this:
http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=28099

Replace Norton with the free AVG http://free.grisoft.com/ or Avast
http://www.avast.com/eng/avast_4_home.html, and Windows Firewall and Windows
Defender. Norton is known to cause many problems in Vista which don’t always
appear immediately.

Download and run the Norton Removal Tool.

http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT...05033108162039

It's called "360" because Symantec's goal is complete ownership of your
computer, and with even less communication about what it's trying to do or
ways to configure it than ever before (which would only interfere with its
goal.) That, along with Symantec's famous technical support, makes Norton
360 a disaster that I would only install on Granny's computer if she was
going to disinherit me.

-------
*Report back, please*
[When responding to posts, please include the post(s) you are replying to so
that others may learn and benefit from the issue]

[How to ask a question]
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

"asmodeus" <asmodeus@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:AC876A68-0C29-4BA5-9955-82C4A7215D46@microsoft.com...
> Could someone give me some plain language help please? When I bought
> Norton
> 360, I thought it would replace the Windows defender series and that this
> would be a good thing to do. Clearly some people do not rate Norton, so
> would
> it be best for me to:
>
> 1) Use Windows Defender only, for firewall, anti-virus etc etc, or 2) Use
> Norton for anti-virus and windows for everything else? or 3) Find another
> anti-virus and use it alongside Windows Defender for everything else?
> Should
> I then also discard the other packages I have bought, including my
> registry
> organiser and the ant-Spyware package. There is so much stuff on the
> market,
> some guidance on an effective line-up would be great. Thank you.
>
> "SG" wrote:
>
>> >>>I never suggested to use ERUNT<<<
>>
>> Nope you didn't and I missed that, my apologies.
>>
>> >>>Based on what...your thinking? You've got to be kidding!<<<
>>
>> Well lets see here Kayman, maybe I should have said something besides
>> "THINK" and suggested after my 18 some years with computer experience,
>> would
>> that suite you better?
>>
>> >>>(but *I* use both utilities without any problems)<<<
>>
>> So, because you didn't have problems that makes these two programs SAFE?,
>> you got to be kidding :>). I wasn't after you Kayman for what you posted,
>> not sure why, but it seems to me you took this personally and that's not
>> the
>> case at all. When I see these snake oil programs and that's all they are,
>> I
>> simply point out they are dangerous. It's been debated for years and
>> probably always will be about compacting the registry and in my
>> professional
>> opinion it doesn't amount to a grain of salt. Do some of these programs
>> really work? I'm sure some do and I know in Win98 Scanreg /Fix and Opt
>> did
>> indeed reduce the size of the Registry. The question was, is it
>> noticeable
>> enough for the user to tell and in many test done by me and many others
>> years was no. BTW, in Win98 and WinMe if the Registry contain more than
>> 500
>> KB of empty data blocks, Windows Registry Checker automatically optimized
>> it.
>>
>> When I see things like:
>> "You may want to disable the tracker to avoid this message in the future
>> (see the Windows help for information on how to do this)" this is
>> referring
>> to the NTREGOPT sometimes fails with error 1450.
>>
>> Right, now lets turn off Tracker so we can run his program without the
>> error
>> not really knowing what other problems this my cause the user and if it
>> did
>> no one would know what or where this new error may be coming from.
>>
>>
>> " To make sure the programs are executed with proper administrative
>> privileges, you should however turn off User Account Control in Vista's
>> system settings "
>>
>> Nothing at all about turning off UAC and the dangers this can cause, for
>> example, the problem lies when turning off UAC after Vista has been used
>> for
>> a while with UAC turned on. Vista intercepts any file operations that
>> attempts to write to a Program Files directory for a specific app, like
>> when
>> a program tries to create a saved file for example. These files are
>> virtualized to a special Program Data folder instead. If you save a file
>> and
>> then turn off UAC, virtualization is also turned off. So then the program
>> can not find the saved file. This can also happen with anything else the
>> application tries to store in its program files directory. You can Google
>> "dangers turning off UAC" and find many reasons NOT to turn it off. I
>> find
>> it amazing the author suggest totally disabling one of the best security
>> features ever in windows only to compact the Registry that supposedly
>> speeds
>> up the system. WOW what a trade off, lets all get infected with Spyware,
>> Trojans and Viruses, but not to worry, with our Registry compacted it
>> will
>> make getting rid of these pest much faster.
>>
>>
>> "Should I disable Windows XP's System Restore function when using ERUNT?
>> Yes! Though System Restore backs up more than just the registry, the
>> registry is essentially all you need to revert your system to a previous
>> state."
>>
>> Now you ask me if I was kidding and you should have ask the author.
>> Disable
>> XP's System Restore for what? to save a little hard drive space? man this
>> is
>> unbelievable. He says the registry is essentially all you need to revert
>> your system to a previous state. Humm, well I guess MS screwed up when
>> they
>> added all the other features that go along with System Restore eh? Hard
>> Drive space is just about a thing of the past and as cheap as they are
>> now
>> no one should be to worried about space. DVD's, CD Writers, Memory Cards
>> and
>> 8 Gig pocket drives at Wal-Mart for $79.00, USB to IDE/SATA cables drives
>> makes it easy for more than enough backup space.
>>
>> Well enough said and again I do apologize if I worded my post to the
>> extent
>> if offended you, it surely wasn't meant to be that way. You can have the
>> last word as I will be moving on and sorry to the OP for high-jacking
>> this
>> thread.
>>
>>
>> --
>> All the best,
>> SG
>>
>> ALEX NICHOL
>> (1935-2005)
>> http://www.aumha.org/alex.htm
>> You will never be forgotten my friend
>>
>> "Kayman" <kaymanDeleteThis@operamail.com> wrote in message
>> news:ea4FW7yeIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>
>>

On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 09:46:01 -0700, asmodeus
<asmodeus@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

> Could someone give me some plain language help please? When I bought Norton
> 360, I thought it would replace the Windows defender series and that this
> would be a good thing to do. Clearly some people do not rate Norton, so would
> it be best for me to:
>
> 1) Use Windows Defender only, for firewall, anti-virus etc etc, or


No. Windows Defender is neither a firewall, nor an anti-virus program.
It is an anti-spyware program.



> 2) Use Norton for anti-virus and windows for everything else?


No. In my opinion, Norton is the worst security software on the
market.


> 3) Find another
> anti-virus and use it alongside Windows Defender for everything else?



Yes. I recommend the freeware Avast! anti-virus. Or if you want to pay
for a product, NOD32 or Kaspersky are well-respected.

But that's not enough. A single anti-spyware program like Defender
isn't good enough. Note what Eric Howes, who has done extensive
testing on Anti-Spyware products, states:

"No single anti-spyware scanner removes everything. Even the
best-performing anti-spyware scanner in these tests missed fully one
quarter of the "critical" files and Registry entries" See
http://spywarewarrior.com/asw-test-guide.htm



> Should
> I then also discard the other packages I have bought, including my registry
> organiser


What's a "registry organizer"? Specifically, what's the name of the
program? Is this a registry *cleaner*?

If so, note that registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil.
Cleaning of the registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the
registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite what many
people think, and what vendors of registry cleaning software try to
convince you of, having unused registry entries doesn't really hurt
you.

The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner erroneously
removing an entry you need is far greater than any potential benefit
it may have.



> and the ant-Spyware package.


*Which* anti-spyware package? There are many and they are not all
equally good. I recommend having at least two good ones. See the quote
from Eric Howes above.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

I am using Windows VISTA, Upon accessing Windows Security Center, I see both
Virus Protection is not found (turned off)

Upon accessing McAfee SecurityCenter, McAfee VirusScan and Personal
Firewall are turned on.

I tried under administrator mode:
Method 1:
>
> winmgmt /verifyrepository
>
> WMI repository is reported to be inconcistent is the ressult.

Then I tried
>
> winmgmt /salvagerepository

WMI repository is reported to be inconcistent is the ressult.

Should I reinstall my virus software downloaded from the vendor (McAfee)?
Please advise what to do for Vista to recognize my McAfee anti-virous software

>


"Charlie42" wrote:

> "Sadie" <Sadie@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> > Upon accessing Windows Security Center, I see both Virus Protection and
> > and Spyware are both turned Off. Upon accessing Security Provider -
> > Symantec, I see only Norton Internet Security listed. What do we need to
> > do for the Windows Security Center to acknowledge Norton 360 installed
> > and working well?
>
> Under the assumption Norton 360 itself reports to be up and running:
> There is a general fix that can solve the problem with Vista reporting
> malware protection is missing, although it is present. All commands are
> typed in at the command prompt, you need to run as administrator:
>
> Method 1:
>
> winmgmt /verifyrepository
>
> If WMI repository is reported to be inconcistent, run the following command:
>
> winmgmt /salvagerepository
>
> Method 2:
>
> net stop winmgmt /y
> cd %windir%\system32\wbem
> ren repository repository.old
>
> Then reboot the computer.
>
> Charlie42
>

For me, the method proposed here worked at first attempt.

"Sadie" wrote:

>
> --
> Sadie
>
>
> "Charlie42" wrote:
>
> > "Sadie" <Sadie@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Upon accessing Windows Security Center, I see both Virus Protection and
> > > and Spyware are both turned Off. Upon accessing Security Provider -
> > > Symantec, I see only Norton Internet Security listed. What do we need to
> > > do for the Windows Security Center to acknowledge Norton 360 installed
> > > and working well?
> >
> > Under the assumption Norton 360 itself reports to be up and running:
> > There is a general fix that can solve the problem with Vista reporting
> > malware protection is missing, although it is present. All commands are
> > typed in at the command prompt, you need to run as administrator:
> >
> > Method 1:
> >
> > winmgmt /verifyrepository
> >
> > If WMI repository is reported to be inconcistent, run the following command:
> >
> > winmgmt /salvagerepository
> >
> > Method 2:
> >
> > net stop winmgmt /y
> > cd %windir%\system32\wbem
> > ren repository repository.old
> >
> > Then reboot the computer.
> >
> > Charlie42
>
> Appreciate your reply. With my tech skills, I will leave as is for now;
> hopefully Norton 360 will improve eventually. Had difficult time removing
> Norton Internet Security 2007 to install Norton 360; mission accomplished &
> pleased. All things will never be perfect!