> I am seeing DAT updates come out pretty much in the same > timeline as the > others and the new ePO 3 has been solid in getting them from NAI and > getting them to the clients. I get notices of new threats now and the > extra.dat, pending a full definition, interim file is a piece > of cake to > push to all my clients (no more manual with ePO 3).
That's one of the other things I don't like about NAI (and Norton, for that matter) - the concept of patching your definitions while you wait for the once a week refresh of the file. That particular process caused me more headaches than I care to remember, frankly. I'll leave it like this: Look back over the last 5 years of traffic on the Exchange list currently hosted[1] by Swynk, and look at the number of people who have had positive experiences with the products versus those who have had negative experiences with products. In that collection of 4000+ admins, its obvious which ones have issues and which ones don't. Roger -------------------------------------------------------------- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. [1] Including before it was hosted by Swynk, when Peter ran it out of his house > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Bartley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 8:59 AM > To: NT 2000 Discussions > Subject: RE: Switching from NAV to GroupShield > > > We use GSE with no problems on E2k and E2k3. However, it did > not used to > be that way. In the past 18 months NAI seems to have > undergone a change > in approach. Their QC seems to be better and their support options > actually function now (I can remember calling support a few years ago > and never actually reaching anyone-sometimes not even a recorded > message). > > Bear in mind that some of the hardest hit corps in recent rounds have > been using Trend and Sybari, as well as others. It all boils down to > proper administration in most cases. Remember, they rate the virus > usually based on how many of "their" customers call in > reporting getting > hit with an infection. They even say so in their press comments. So, > apparently, all the vendors can have a virus get by. > > I am seeing DAT updates come out pretty much in the same > timeline as the > others and the new ePO 3 has been solid in getting them from NAI and > getting them to the clients. I get notices of new threats now and the > extra.dat, pending a full definition, interim file is a piece > of cake to > push to all my clients (no more manual with ePO 3). > > I also have not been hit with any of the prolific Trojans or virus' > (knock on wood-nothing is foolproof). Even when only hours > old. In those > cases where someone has used OE or some other POP3 app, the > desktop has > caught them every time. When I first got here, a couple of years ago, > they were running Symantec and almost every desktop had some kind of > infection. When I migrated the Exchange server to a new one, I got > almost 1500 infected emails caught by GSE that Symantec had let in. > > Yes, NAI will gladly help with the migration and yes you will actually > get someone to talk to in a few minutes or less. > > Despite lumping them all together, I will say that Symantec > seems to be > the last vendor I would ever recommend. As recently as last week there > were reports of one of their definitions causing their scanning engine > to shut down. > > Best Regards, > > Dan Bartley > > -----Original Message----- > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 08:31 > To: NT 2000 Discussions > > On Exchange, there are only two vendors worth considering. > One is Trend > (my > choice), the other is Sybari. No one else has correctly created a > process > for accessing the mail data and passing it to the scanning engine. > Norton, > NAI and others have never had a completely stable hook into the mail > stores. > > Over the last 5-6 years, I've done a seat of the pants tracking of > antivirus > definitions, and without fail, Trend is one of the earliest and is the > most > consistent in releasing definitions to catch and clean data. > > We have used Norton on the desktop for the last 2-3 years, and > consistently > have issues with the instability it brings to the client PCs. Our > support is > up at the end of the year and we will be replacing it with OfficeScan > from > Trend. > > Prior to Norton, we had the NAI/McAfee corporate solution (I > want to say > the > 4.x range of products, its been 3 years), and consistently and without > fail > could not keep more than 50% of our clients current. We went as far as > having one of the NAI engineers onsite to demonstrate and > help configure > an > ePO server for testing. That server never successfully > managed a single > client. > > On the other hand, we've run Trend for close to 4 years, and > I ran Trend > for > a few prior to my arrival here, and have yet to be the victim of any > email > borne virus outbreaks. > > In the end, Trend's track record in my envrionment, with our > experiences, > has proven its the best product out there for our money. > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP > Sr. Systems Administrator > Inovis Inc. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 8:13 AM > > To: NT 2000 Discussions > > Subject: RE: Switching from NAV to GroupShield > > > > > > Roger, > > > > Why? You obviously have some feelings on the issue. Please share. > > > > ======================== > > Not to Roger specifically. But wanted to put this in w/out > > doing a new > > message. > > > > Corporate NAV 8 users: > > "We experienced a major failure in our Symantec Antivirus > protection > > software today, caused by a faulty set of definition updates > > from Symantec. > > Specifically, the updates they released yesterday > > (rc:Thursday, June 19th) > > via their Intelligent Updater mechanism had a problem that > > caused all 8.0 > > clients to choke. Earlier versions of clients (7.5) were not > > affected. The > > problem was somewhere in the mechanism that performs > "microdefinition > > updates". " > > > > Symantec tech support said they were aware of the problem, > > and provided me > > with a way to fix affected systems: copy the full 4 MB .VDB > > file to those > > systems, and then restart the service or reboot the system if > > the service > > could not be restarted. > > > > Issue: > > Symantec has not issued any security alert for this issue, > > nor have they > > posted any information on their website, at least not in any > > location that > > I've been able to find so far. > > > > > > > > At 06:14 6/24/2003, you wrote: > > >No one in their right mind would do that, so I'm thinking > > you won't get many > > >real world examples of it. > > > > > >-------------------------------------------------------------- > > >Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP > > >Sr. Systems Administrator > > >Inovis Inc. > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Alexander Kha Do [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 7:05 PM > > > > To: NT 2000 Discussions > > > > Subject: Switching from NAV to GroupShield > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyone ever converted an Exchange 2000 server from Norton for > > > > Exchange to GroupShield 5.2 for Exchange? > > > > > > > > Know what the issues are? Residual effects on performance / > > > > stability? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > ------ > > > > You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Web Interface: > > > > http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=nt2000&tex > > >t_mode=&lang=english > > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% > > > > > >------ > > >You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >Web Interface: > > >http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=nt2000&te > xt_mode=&lang=english > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% > > > > > ------ > You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Web Interface: > http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=nt2000&tex t_mode=&la ng=e nglish To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% ------ You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=nt2000&text_mode=&la ng=english To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% ------ You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=nt2000&text_mode=&lang=e nglish To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% ------ You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=nt2000&text_mode=&lang=english To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
