norton antivirus 2003 problems

I have windows98. I completely uninstalled NAV2002 before installing NAV2003. After it says installation successful and I go to register, I get a performed illegal operation box. If I just try to open NAV2003 from the icon, I get the same message. Symantec said that only about 5 people had this problem. I tried eveything that Symantec said,even completely wiping out my system and starting over. After reinstall, got the same message. HELP!!!!

 

I was having trouble with the NAV 2003 install. The install would complete OK and then on the required reboot, the PC would do a spontaneous reboot, part way through the Windows initialization process. Before it even gets to starting to load programs. The only way out, was to go to Safe mode, uninstall NAV and all was well again.

Symantec has been of no help whatsoever, and my ticket is still open.

But, in MY troubleshooting, I found that it was the SYMTDI.vxd service that was now loading at boot time. And, it was conflicting with "something ".

I went to Regedit and deleted the entry of this file in HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Shared DLLs

And also in HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\VxD

I just did the register process and it went fine for me (thanks, I forgot).

The rest of NAV seems to be working fine. When Symantec support finally choose the talk to me again, I will explain what I have done, and "try" to get them to explain the function of this VXD, and what potentially problems I may have by not loading it.

So, a long winded answer, but you could try doing the same deletes and see it there is any difference. If not, then just readd them, or do a DOS Scanreg /restore (do a Scanreg /backup first, from Windows)

Post back if it helps. Then at least there are six of us!!

 

I think this is the Symantec 'Redirector'

To find out more read This

Hope this helps while you wait for the reply from the techs

tofastgt - have you ran an online virus scan ? ( just in case )

I know Symantec will have told you to install on a fresh boot of Windows ( with as little as possible running ) It seems their software likes to have full scope when installing. Fine if it's a fresh hard drive but not so good if it's a re-install. Just wish they would realise that re-install is necessary at times

 

From a used to be very firm LLOOONNGGGGGG time Norton supporter.

I would forget about the expensive, system overloading, no better than any other NAV.

And go with AVG which is just as good. Cheaper ( right now anway ) and FAR, FAR less system loading. ( almost standalone ) It is also not Windows version specific as Norton can be. Even if they start charging AVG is still better.

You can use the NAV unistall and still need to spend quite some time doing a MANUAL regedit to get it all out of the Registry. And if you do not get it all, it may keep another install from working properly.

If Norton Products do not install properly THE FIRST TIME they can be one real big PITA thereafter. And if it does not install right it will not un-install right either.

WhitPhil

I had rorughly the same problem with just one difference. IT WOULD NOT un-install. Not even from safe mode. So without me saying it, you know the amount of manual work I had to do.

BillyBob

 

minB:
Thanks for the info. Since I don't use the email checking, dear old Redirector is probably not in the picture, and all will be well.

BB:
I hear you!
This is the first time that I have had any issues at all with Norton products. I've been a fan (and still am) for quite a while.
At least they have created utiltiies to help in the uninstall process, in the event the add/remove fails to work.

 

Norton AV got a not-so-flattering writeup in the September issue of Consumer Reports.

The article, "When Good Software Goes Bad," devoted several paragraphs subheaded, "A troublesome product," to Symantec, its Norton product and its lack of accessible, effective support.

Since Consumer Reports isn't exactly a tech publication, for one software package to be singled out to that extent you know something major's gotta' be wrong with it.

In addition, it took Consumer Reports using its influence to get Symantec to help the guy with the problem he was having, which was an inability to get a malfunctioning Norton System Works uninstalled so he could install something else.

 

You are welcome.

WHY do you not use E-Mail checking.?

I checked e-mail with MailWahser this morning and there were three that had a possible Virus. They were of course deleted right off of the server.

At least they have created utiltiies to help in the uninstall process, in the event the add/remove fails to work.

I still use some of the Utilities also. But the Utilities are the only part that I have installed. NAV & NIS left a long time ago. Both in XP and 98SE.

BillyBob

 

I am wondering and my findings.

Is the problem all Symatec or is it in part Microsoft.

Or a Combination of same.

I have found that Windows ( 98SE and/or XP ) may not install the same on every machine. Or even the same on the same machine every time.

Products like Norton usually look for certain things to be in a certain place and may not find it if it is somewhere else.

But as to Norton products in general ( NAV being the wosrt part ) they have ALWAYS been a B***H to un-install a bad install. ( or even a good install ) It seems even more so in XP Pro.

In XP RegSeeker sure helped a lot in cleaning out Norton. But I still had to do some MANUAL regediting to get it all.

I ran for quite awhile with AVG AV and Norton Firewall and had no problems.

But the part about Norton NAV that I do not care for the most is that it gets its big red nose too deeply into the system where it is not needed.

And when I can run a ( close to if not ) standalone FREE AV program and have just as good protection I think proves my point. And it is also NOT Windows version specific.

But one problem I do know about Norton is that it uses a HUGH amount of SHARED files. And if these are not taken off the HD before a re-install attempt is made it may create problems.

And also if I have several parts of Norton Software and wish to remove just one part I have had to un-install EVERYTHING ( including the shared flies from the HD ) before I can re-install things that I do want to use. And this is all do to the SHARED files I believe

BillyBob

 

I don't use the Mail Checking feature because it is redundant.

With NAV Autoprotect running, if there is a virus in the email, either as HTML code or as an attachment, it will be detected when/if I read it, and when/if I detach the attachment.

 

WhitPhil

Thank you for the honest answer

BUT. My thinking is.

With some of the newer Viruses that are around that may be TOO LATE Especially if using OE or Outlook.

Many of the newer ones only need to be downloaded from the server with no other actions by the user.

I believe your idea should be the SECOND line of defense. Not the first.

Your machine. Your call.

On my machine(s) MailWasher is the first line of checking and AVG E-Mail checking is the second. I should not need the 3rd line. ( the way you do it ) unless something should slip by the 1st two.

Oh BTW. I am glad if you are having good luck with NAV auto-protect. It did nothing other than SLOW my machine down. And cause conflicts.

If you are having good luck with NAV then more power to you.

BillyBob

 

I don't "believe" that a virus can infect your machine by just being downloaded. (I assume that you mean, from your ISP into the OE inbox).

The user has to do something with the piece of mail. Either open it completely, open the attachment or view it in preview mode.

Regardless, this is where the "intrusiveness" of an AV like Norton works. The hooks to the AV are inserted such that anytime something is opened/executed/saved/etc. the AV gets to look at it before Windows.

This note explains why it is redundant. There is also a Symantec note that states the same. But it currently escapes me!

 

OK. I may interpet the link you pointed to differently
And unless I read wrong that link points to NAV 2000 which anyone with a newer OS should not be running anyway.

To me redundancy would be something like running both NAV and AVG AV software.

But with NAV Auto Protect and E-Mail checking are TWO DIFFERENT parts of the same AV program. And both doing different jobs.

I read it as saying that E-Mail protection SHOULD be enabled as a an extra line of defense.

I do not see it as being in any way redundant. If I were to ( and I did ) shut anything off it was the system loading and trouble causing Auto Protect. Especialliy if you forget to shut it off when installing software. ( if we are referring to the same thing that is )

From the link;
Disabling Email Protection does not leave you vulnerable to viruses and malicious software in email. It is a separate layer of protection in addition to Auto-Protect.

Please note that is saysSEPARATE LAYER OF PROTECTION IN ADDITION To Auto Protect. But what it does not say is that E-Mail checking is the FIRST line of defense. Even before Auto Protect. If you see it as redundant then that is up to you.

But I do agree to problems with NAV and OE E-mail Checking. But I DUMPED OE a long time ago ( way back in the days of Win95 ) and have used Eudora since.

And as I mentioned before I use MailWasher ( as another added bit of at least checking ) for what it was designed. Pre-screen the mail and DUMP stuff right off of the server so the it does not get to my machine anyway. It helps in keeping A LOT of TRASH from ever getting downloaded.

BillyBob

 

"But with NAV Auto Protect and E-Mail checking are TWO DIFFERENT parts of the same AV program. And both doing different jobs. "

Nah! There are doing the same job (checking for viruses) in 2 different spots (hence the word separate).

The last sentence in the link says it all.

"As long as you keep your virus definitions up to date with LiveUpdate, and keep Auto-Protect enabled and set to scan files as they are created or downloaded, your system is fully protected. "

Hence, my term redundant. Why check twice when once, with Autoprotect, is enough?

BTW and just out of interest, I never disable Autoprotect when I do installs. I know that "recommendation" is everywhere, but I have never (knock on wood) had any problems. NAV will sometimes give warnings as the install progresses, because it is modifying EXE files, changing config.sys, etc. But they all install just fine!

 

WhitPhil ~ regarding disabling NAV when installing. I normally did this as routine considering we are told to 'disable AV software' BUT recently I have talked to others on the matter and they never disable this when installing.

Your post has now confirmed that disabling is not always the correct procedure with Norton. It may be that this allows the software control over the new installation also. This would also be reasonable considering the fact that if Norton software is installed before anything there are less problems as everything is set up prior to installations.

I have been doing extensive research on all AV's & Firewalls - trying to convince myself to come away from Norton as I am aware of the resources & shared folder situation. I must admit I have hesitated as Norton has been my one and only AV & Firewall. I had a friend with me a few weeks ago & he could not believe just how Norton actually worked (he was very anti-norton)He realised that I was browsing 99% free of ads.etc + the fact that Norton had his own Pop3 type thing to filter my mail.

I do get disheartened when I think about the problems & resources but still have not taken the break away. My new PC is going to be one of the Hyper threaded 2.8Ghz (800MHz FSB) with 123GB + 60GB hard + 1GB RAM - this being the case I don't think I should have to worry about Norton slowing things down!

My ISP also uses Norton to filter e-mails & catch anything before I even download. I also have the benefit to view these via my ISP & select what I want to download. They take any spam away too.

When I consider I would have a lot of add ons to the various Firewalls & AV's to give me the features that I have with Norton I am tending to think perhaps it is not all bad news. I still have a little time to be 100% sure. It also depends on just how your PC is set up & what other programs are installed.
I have gathered a lot of info. & a lot more knowledge of the theory behind all the scenarios. This has been an interesting Post as I have more pros & cons to add to my research file

 

That my Friend is a VERY IMPORTANT fact that can not or at least should not be overlooked.

And can have a great deal to do with how ANY software or even the OS itself behaves.

And them we add Personal Preference to that and up comes differences like night and day.

It is not always the OS.
It is not always hardware.
It is not always the software.
It is not always Personal preference.

But it is always ( or at least most often ) the combination of the above that can make a difference in how things behave.

And last but certainly not least. One piece of software ( in this case Norton ) is NOT suitable for everyone and every machine.

BillyBob

 

Hi Folks - I started a new thread on 'fatal exception at 0E 0028:00000001', as my PC now freezes in normal boot/startup mode with the above blue screen message, and for a couple of weeks before during startup we frequently got messages either that NAV autoprotect had not loaded or that NAV could not start email protection. My version of NAV is actually 2002 Home, with an updated subscription, and everything was bang up to date up to and including the new definitions for Sobig virus.

Anybody able to associate my fatal exception message with NAV? And if uninstall does not clear the decks completely, can anyone tell me how to locate the registry entries that would need to be deleted - I guess using the F5 search? But what keywords?

Hoping someone can help me get the PC back out of safe mode!

 

norton antivirus 2003 problems

this

and this

My version of NAV is actually 2002 Home,

Do not make sense. One or the other is wrong.

The error message(s) itself ( themselves ) answer the question.

Do a Reg Search using Norton. And then one using Symantec.

Then before restarting the machine DELETE ANY and ALL folders that contain Symantec software.

And if on XP shutdown System restore. As any Restore points already made will be wrong anyway and if used you will be starting all over again.

And if using 98 delete all RB00X.CAB files in the C:\Windows\sysbckup folder. Then restart.

It looks very much like you have been running for two weeks WITHOUT proper Virus protection. Unless you have another one loaded and running. In which case the two of them may be creating problems for each other. NAV DOES NOT like competion.

BillyBob

 

If you are going to uninstall the product you should use one (or all) of the following:

1. The products uninstall program
2. The products manual uninstall procedure
3. A registry product that can select and delete based on a product name. (such as JVs)

Using Regedit and doing Finds will NOT find all pieces of an uninstall. Every program reference in the registry does not contain text that refers to the manufacturer or the product. The Finds will find some of the pieces and then leave a bunch of dangling pieces, that may still cause the reinstall not to work. Or, that will still get in the way.

Norton Removal Utilityand other removal instructions/links

 

And neither will the unistallers.

I have run a manual reg check AFTER running the uninstallers that you mentioned and found TONS of dangling pieces that they missed.

And the unistallers DO NOT always wipe the folders from the HD.

To do a real good through job it takes BOTH the unistallers AND a manual reg edit.

Norton products are a B**** to get rid of. That is one of the several reasons I no longer use them.

Regardless of how good Windows and/or other software is getting to be it still takes a little MANUAL work now and then to keep them both in line.

BillyBob