On 12/7/12 9:51 AM, Justin Wood (Callek) wrote: > Hey Guys, > > So I have to say, I am quite annoyed with Symantec/Norton at the moment. > > Our Beta 2, which has been out for ~ a week, and I submitted the > whitelist request to Norton ~12 hours before the *DAY* of our release, > still is not complete. > > With the release cadence we have/need, the turnaround time on their > whitelisting is completely unacceptable/bad. It completely hurts our > ability to get meaningful data for betas, and hurts our ability to keep > our release users up to date with latest stability/security updates. > > My proposal: > * No longer wait for Symantec to indicate that the whitelisting is complete > * Mention it on our known-issues page that Norton can interact badly > with us on occassion > * Specifically list the .dll's [by name] it thinks are viruses on our > known-issues page as "ok" and "Norton's fault" > * Continue to submit whitelisting requests ASAP > * Continue to move forward with getting signed builds out [`may` help > with this] > * Continue to *try* getting a human contact at Norton to see if/when we > can speed up their process or fix this misidentification, and how. > > The key point is this *will* be a pain point for windows users who have > Norton, where the most-logical solution for those users is to *disable* > their Virus Software during the duration of SeaMonkey use. And is > specifically manifests in the following ways: > * Quarantines 1-or-2 dll's > * The dll's affect our cryptography ability, in such that them missing > may/could break some https sites from functioning/cause crashes etc. (I > haven't witnessed it, but I also have avoiding us ever shipping in this > case) > * Restoration of the dll's seems to sign/modify them slightly such that > partial updates fail for these users, and end up having to download > updates twice (the second download being our full 20ish MB download). > > I am literally treating this as a proposal for the community, we have no > sane way to detect the presence of Norton and delay JUST those updates. > > This is not a vote, and I will take on the final call [unless the > SeaMonkey Council think that they as a whole should make the final > call]. So reasons for/against are appreciated, including "me toos", or > "please no" though I'd appreciate reasons for any of those mails. > > With *myself* as a Symantec user as well [in my case because it came > pre-installed on my computer, and I decided to just register/subscribe > rather than fight and try to remove/switch] it is a bad situation to > have to be in, but I feel this is a decision I need community input on, > rather than decided that some subset of our users will have to suffer > due to a larger companies issues. >
My favorite computer shop (now defunct, alas) advised me several years ago to remove Symantec's Norton AV, which was causing more problems than it prevented. Instead, they suggested using AVG anti-virus, freeware from <http://www.avg.com/us-en/homepage>. However, they also suggested installing the freeware version of Malwarebytes from <http://www.malwarebytes.org/>, which requires manual running; they told me to run it every so often. As for your problem, my suggestion would be a strongly-worded (but not hostile) postal letter from the head of the Mozilla Project (or from the president of the Mozilla Foundation) to the CEO of Symantec: Mr. Stephen M. Bennett, President Symantec Corporation 350 Ellis Street Mountain View, CA 94043 USA I also suggest the users of Norton AV also send letters to Mr. Bennett. -- David E. Ross <http://www.rossde.com/> Anyone who thinks government owns a monopoly on inefficient, obstructive bureaucracy has obviously never worked for a large corporation. © 1997 by David E. Ross _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
