Endpoint Protection

Greetings all, this is a little lengthy.
When I initiate a Norton scan on my computer the scan immediately stops with the prompt - scan stopped by user - which is flase. Norton definitions updated sucessfully recently but this issue started after the last time new definitions were actually downloaded (last week). There is one virus in quarantine - Bloodhound.PDF.13 - and it is in a file named - plugin-readme.pdf. This has been in quarantine since February 2010 when it was first encountered. Norton virus history reports the virus encountered 8 times since February, in its orginal location (a temp folder on C: drive) and action taken - left alone -  but it is unclear to me whether this is routine and the virus is in fact safely in quarantine since Feb.

I use FF almost exclusively for browsing and have noticed initial load time is much longer than it used to be, for quite some time now. When Norton was sucessfully completing a scan no new viruses have been found since the Feb capture of the Bloodhound.PDF.13 in plugin-readme.pdf. So that is the background.

I am a webmaster but not schooled in computer programming. I do FTP changes and new pages to our secure server (hosted on DataPipe), and I have always trusted Norton/Symantec to keep me safe from active viruses (we have a corporate account for many years now). Now I am concerned.

1. How do I get Norton to scan again?
2. Shoud I attempt to clean Bloodhound or leave it in quarantine?
3. is FF likely slowed by a virus corruption?

Thank you all for your assistance and suggestions in advance.

Are you running a current version of Norton? Make sure you have the latest definitions for your AV , then boot into safe mode and running a Disk Cleanup (right-click the C drive, Properties, Disk Cleanup) - that will delete all the files that are in these temporary locations, as well as IE's temporary files, etc. Perform a full system scan in safe mode.

You can remove items from the Quarantine. If you remove an item, it cannot be restored later.

BTW, for Norton issues check out the Norton users forum - http://community.norton.com/norton/

Thomas

I am running Norton full version: 7.60.926. License type: server.client gold (mfg only). I assume that is current. Norton reports that I have the latest definitions. I will try to boot in safe mode and see if Norton will scan, but as I said, when i attempt to scan now in normal bootup Norton immediately stops and flasely says - scan stopped by user.

I think you're experiencing what these users are experiencing.  This is, I believe, an old version of Norton.

https://www-secure.symantec.com/connect/forums/scan-stopped-user
https://www-secure.symantec.com/connect/forums/symantec-antivirus-corporate-edition-2002-scan-stopped-user-message

Bloodhound is a heuristic detection.  It is possible it is a PDF with inserted malicious code.  It is probably not related to the message you are seeing.

sandra

It appears that version is Norton Antivirus 2001. You really should consider upgrading to a current AV engine. The threat landscape has changed dramatically over the last nine years. A product that old cannot protect you from modern day infections.

I rebooted in safe mode, then started Norton full scan and same result: stopped by user message, which is false.

Cycletech-
Norton Live Update states: "All of the Symantec products installed on your computer are currently up-to-date. Remember to check for new updates frequently. LiveUpdate session is complete." - I thought that meant I was protected with the latest virus defenses, no? To my knowledge we have never received an email advising us to upgrade to a newer AV engine. I have our original account info. How do I go about upgrading then? Is that included in our original corporate subscription?

Your definitions are up to date, but the detection engine is running on 2001 technology. You should have received something that stated your product was going to be End-of-Life, and no longer supported. Are you subscibing to product updates? 

For available Enterprise products visit - http://www.symantec.com/business/index.jsp

For retail - http://www.symantec.com/norton/index.jsp

To chat with a Symantec sales rep visit - https://sales.liveperson.net/hc/71097838/?cmd=file&file=visitorWantsToChat&site=71097838&SV!chat-button-name=chat-sales-business-english&SV!chat-button-room=chat-sales-business-english&referrer=%28button%20dynamic-button:chat-sales-business-english%28Symantec%20Endpoint%20Protection:%20Purchasing%20Options%20-%20Symantec%20Corp.%29%29%20http://www.symantec.com/business/products/purchasing.jsp?pcid=pcat_security&pvid=endpt_prot_1&SESSIONVAR!skill=sales-business-english

Best,
Thomas

It seems that Symantec killed their own product with an update.  I'm unemployed and can't afford to run out and buy something else.  I want my Symantec Antivirus Corporate Edition V 8.1.0.825 back to running the way it was before!

For protection as a short term solution, you can download the Norton AntiVirus 2011 Beta version for free.

http://www.symantec.com/norton/beta/overview.jsp?pvid=nav2011beta_overview

When you say it is a short term solution what does that mean?  How long will it work?  Does it over-ride the old version I have?  I am with some of the others on this forum who have said we paid for this software and we should be able to continue using it.  Shouldn't the upgrades allow you to deal with all the changes?

For the user that is unemployed, the beta might buy him some time until AV protection can be purchased.
The Beta is only intended for testing and should not be used on a production system.

Is there anything I need to do before uninstalling Norton Antivirus V.7.60.926?  That is, do I need to do anything with my settings?

What do you mean by "production machine"?

So I can use the Beta product for however long I want but there is no support?

When you say "test" product does that mean my computer is not sufficiently protected with this BETA version?

At no point will I incur any costs using this test Beta product?  I did install it and had to click on "Agree" on terms but no terms were listed so I want to be sure I have not purchased anything by clicking.

Thanks.

After using Norton for more than 10 years I am now going elsewhere.   Causing a product to stop working without notice even though you still provide definition updates is just unacceptable.

You guys blew it on this one.

that sums it up very well

Lets just say you paid $30 for the Symantec product back in 2001. Now nine years later it no longer works and you want to bail out from Symantec. Think about the protection you received for the last 9 years at a cost of just over a 3 dollars a year. Is it worth changing to another AV product just because you failed to keep your systems protection technology current?

Norton is by far the best consumer AV  product out there. I do not say that because I work here, I say that because I have used it on my personal/business systems for many years without problems.


As I stated in my first post,  you should post Norton issues in the Norton Community. Please do that ASAP and see where it  goes from there.


http://community.norton.com/norton/

Thanks,
Thomas

Product upgrades (not updates) on any commercial software product are hardly ever free.  Purchasing XP back when it was first released does not entitle anyone to the much improved Windows 7, for example, for free.  I don't mean to sound unsympathetic, but when a software package is nearly a decade old, one has to expect at some point it is might stop working as operating systems, etc. change and improve.

sandra

I cant believe some one is complaining about a very old piece of security software not functioning with todays newest threats.

If you are truly that frugal and/or can not comprehend it then...
Go away, get AVG free and stop complaing here about it.

You are making me laugh way to hard about this.

Please do not try to encourage me to go out and purchase another product if you are going to break the one I have, I don't care if it's affordable or not.  This isn't about what's easy, or what we should be 'forced' to go out and buy.

This is about the breaking of a product we already had purchased.  If Symantec's update to an old system caused that system to malfunction, that's not acceptable any more than a tire company having thugs go around slashing tires they deem to be "too old"...

I'm an employee who was given access to the computer I use at work, and the VS is now disabled.  As an employee, I do not have the ability of modifying the computer on my own purchasing software for it on my own dime.

And even if I did, I have to wonder if I want to do business with the kind of company would damage it's own product when they felt I needed to upgrade.

I am a loyal Symantec customer and purchase ALL of my personal VS products from you, and have for 10+ years. 

Please fix this problem; that will prove that you care about your customers and are worthy of this kind of loyalty. 

Symantec is the best on the market - please don't screw it up by hosing us.

@ZorroFonzarelli
"This is about the breaking of a product we already had purchased."
 ... 8 years ago.

"...that's not acceptable any more than a tire company having thugs go around slashing tires they deem to be "too old"..."
 - It's more like a tire shop telling you to replace your tires because they were worn to shreds by the razer-covered roads you've been driving on. I explain further on about why you need to upgrade.

"I'm an employee who was given access to the computer I use at work, and the VS is now disabled.  As an employee, I do not have the ability of modifying the computer on my own purchasing software for it on my own dime."
 - Of course. It's your employer's responsibility to update the software. No reasonable person expects you to pay for anything here. I don't understand what this has to do with the issue at hand.

"And even if I did, I have to wonder if I want to do business with the kind of company would damage it's own product when they felt I needed to upgrade."
 - There is no malicious intent here. The simple fact is the version you're using is severely out-dated and we do not test the updates on older versions. There are certain components that are shared by all of our virus protection software and in order to continue to protect the customers that actually give us money to protect them, we have to update our currently supported software.
 - Yes, we do feel you need to upgrade. This is NOT because we are cleverly devising new ways to get you to give us your money. We want you to upgrade because you're not protected. SAV 8 was designed to combat threats that were present in 2002. Threats in 2010 are a whole new beast. Even if SAV 8 was still working, I assure you, it is not protecting you the way you think. It's like bringing a knife to a gun fight... or probably more like bringing a knife to a nuclear war.

I don't understand how anyone can call themselves a customer when the last purchase was made 7-8 years ago. I don't understand how anyone can be upset about getting 8 years of service from a piece of software. Par for the course in the software world is two years, and I think that's being generous.

I wasn't expecting an official response so quickly - thank you.

>>>> - It's more like a tire shop telling you to replace your tires because they were worn to shreds by the razer-covered roads you've been driving on. I explain further on about why you need to upgrade.<<<<

I have no problem with upgrading.  The Norton AntiVirus Corporate Edition system on this computer dates from 2000, and I've talked to my manager about the issue and expressed my concerns. 

For my 2x PC's at home, I go out and purchase the latest Norton System Works every single year and have done so since I have owned a computer.  Norton is worlds better than my brief go with McAfee.


>>>> - Of course. It's your employer's responsibility to update the software. No reasonable person expects you to pay for anything here. I don't understand what this has to do with the issue at hand.<<<<

That was in reference to the other posts on the thread that are dismissing the issue by claiming that we should just "go out and upgrade", which for some people isn't as much an option as others.  I fully intend to push for upgrading, but certain companies aren't able to do so as easily.


>>>> - There is no malicious intent here. The simple fact is the version you're using is severely out-dated and we do not test the updates on older versions. There are certain components that are shared by all of our virus protection software and in order to continue to protect the customers that actually give us money to protect them, we have to update our currently supported software.<<<<

When you put it into that context, I understand the issue a little more clearly.  The assumption that is made on our end is that the updates put out will work for the installed version.  The frustration that I and others are having is that this is the first time an update harmed the system we had.  If it had no impact, or if we were told we couldn't get the update because it might damage our existing VS system, there'd be no problem.

The insinuation of 'malicious intent' was made out of frustration, not exactly logic; thanks for your understanding.


>>>> - Yes, we do feel you need to upgrade. This is NOT because we are cleverly devising new ways to get you to give us your money. We want you to upgrade because you're not protected. SAV 8 was designed to combat threats that were present in 2002. Threats in 2010 are a whole new beast. Even if SAV 8 was still working, I assure you, it is not protecting you the way you think. It's like bringing a knife to a gun fight... or probably more like bringing a knife to a nuclear war.<<<<

As I said, I understand the issue and I'd never let this kind of thing happen with my personal use computers. 

The core frustration of the users that are upset is that what they did have stopped working because of a new update, and at the end of the day, that really shouldn't happen.  While everyone that can upgrade should upgrade, it would really be helpful if you were to work with the people who can't upgrade to ensure they have what they can have, IMHO.

If anyone is just too lazy to go out and get a new VS system after 10 years, there's not much sympathy to be had for them...

Thanks for your timely response; it saved a customer. ;)

Ryan_Dasso said:

"Even if SAV 8 was still working, I assure you, it is not protecting you the way you think"

That's very true since May 11, 2010 - you no longer have file scanning.  I'm impressed that you are wise enough to know how I think.  Can you elaborate on how SAV 8 was NOT detecting boot sector or file based virus before May 11, 2010?  Put another way - if you exclude all of the other features of an "all-in-one" and just focus on the core detection technology, can you give an example of what SAV8 was failing to detect?

Here's some insight to how I think;  Dr. Knuth described the quick-sort algorithm before you were born.  That algorithm is just as relevant today is it was then.  You cannot compare a well written algorithm to a set of tires on a car.  Sorting does not suddenly "break" itself.  Algorithm's's do not suddenly defy logic or mathematical proofs.  It is wrong to think that all software (a collection of algorithms) is automatically "defective" just because it is old.

Perhaps a better analogy would be to think of the virus def's as a formulation of gasoline.  Our old engines have been running along just fine on the gas we've been getting from Symantec.  But on May 11, 2010 Symantec changed the formulation of the gasoline.  There were no warnings on the pumps!  We just filled our tanks like we have for years and then we were perplexed when our engines died.  Sure our engines are old and slow and dont do all the fancy things new engines can do, but they got us down the road.

"WE" get it - we need to buy a new engine.  I think Symantec could have handled this better.  I think it would have been nice to post warnings on the pumps.  I also think Symantec should continue to make available some of the old formulation for a little while,  so "We" can have time to react.

Your turn, what do you think?

ThatoldITGuy

Since I clearly see that Symantec is forcing loyal customers to buy a new antivirus program. My older XP system do not need a top of the line antivirus program, anyway. I need a list of comparable anti-virus manufacturers, preferably not Symantec that will work on my older File server/Workstation setup. This action by symantec (Not communicating ahead of time regarding this issue)tells me, they do not care about their loyal customer base. Sadly yours CieCorpMgr

Algorithm's's do not suddenly defy logic or mathematical proofs.

But algorithms are refined and improved and threats have developed and changed to beat it.  As for what SAV 8 was failing to detect?  I can't tell you off the top of my head; I don't have a catalog of threat names at my disposal, unfortunately.  I can tell you that I have spoken to more than one customer who upgraded from SAV 9 to SAV 10 or even SEP, who suddenly were detecting all manner of spyware that the older version could not.  

There were no warnings on the pumps!

But there were, at least in this case.

For example, from:
http://www.symantec.com/business/security_response/definitions/download/detail.jsp?gid=savce

Symantec Antivirus 8.0 reached its End of Support Life as of November 30, 2005 and Symantec Antivirus 8.1 reached its End of Support Life as of January 31, 2007, as defined in the Symantec Enterprise Technical Support Policy. Therefore virus definition updates are no longer supported for this product.

Symantec Antivirus 9.x will reach its End of Support Life as of March 31, 2009. Virus definition updates for version 9.x will be discontinued on April 1, 2009. Please contact your account manager or reseller for information about our current shipping versions.

I don't know when this boilerplate might have been last updated, and it is likely that this is not the only place this message appears, but I can guarantee you it was not 10 May 2010.

I don't understand, particularly in a business environment where critical personal or financial data may be at stake, the fierce pushback at the notion that perhaps, like all things in the computer world have evolved, it might be necessary to move beyond software that was developed almost a decade ago.  Yes, it can be a bit costly, but the alternative might be the cost of  rebuilding/recovery efforts, loss of data or of confidence by the corporate customers' customers.

May I suggest signing up for the following?

http://www.symantec.com/business/support/news_bulletins/index.jsp

(I can almost guarantee you at some point in the future, if (or rather, when) SAV 9 suddenly stops updating or functioning correctly, a similiar outcry is going to happen all over again.)

sandra

Would somebody tell me what file to delete or edit in my computer to allow my older Corporate Edition anti-virus program to perform the schedule scan? Symantec has block it somehow and I need to unblock it. I would like to have the choice when to update or upgrade this particular program, and not forced to do it. By the way I have in my office 6 other laptops and workstations, they are all protected "Maybe, come to think of it" with the latest IS 2010 or Norton 360. I am currently paying yearly subscriptions for all of this products. I need an answer !Pronto! (Soon) thanks CieCorpMgr

I guess my analogy is somewhat lost on you.  The pump is Liveupdate, not some obscure bulletin.  Surely you don't believe that the average user is up on all of the EOL notices?  Do you?

The fix seems easy to me, Symantec should push a version of Liveupdate that simply refuses to download defs that the program no longer supports.  This way we can become "informed" consumers.  I have to believe that someone at Symantec can write that algorithm.

Symantec should be in the business of protecting data, not misleading users intentionally or unintentionally into believing they are protected.  But that's whats happening every time a user reads the version of the Virus Definition File.  What's offensive is that you and Symantec in general do not appear to be willing to take responsibility for this.  You must understand that the risk to these uninformed consumers goes up every single day.  It's unthinkable that a "security" company would stand by and let this happen.  Perhaps you should freshen up your resume.

By the way, I followed your recommendation and updated my 8.1 to 10.2 then ran a full scan.  No virus found - no surprise here.

ThatOldITGuy.

Great analogy "thatoldITguy"

"Perhaps a better analogy would be to think of the virus def's as a formulation of gasoline.  Our old engines have been running along just fine on the gas we've been getting from Symantec.  But on May 11, 2010 Symantec changed the formulation of the gasoline.   There were no warnings on the pumps!  We just filled our tanks like we have for years and then we were perplexed when our engines died.  Sure our engines are old and slow and dont do all the fancy things new engines can do, but they got us down the road."

I'm really dissapointed with this sudden change WITHOUT any notice and that's what bothers me the most !  What are you thinking symantec ?  Is anyone from symantec going to respond to us ?

give it a try; not sure about NOrtan this is for sAV

Message: "Scan stopped by user" when launching a manual scan

http://service1.symantec.com/support/ent-security.nsf/854fa02b4f5013678825731a007d06af/ef06f50fcab0ce1188256a2200272927?OpenDocument

Not a good comparison. The combustion engine is basically the same as it  was 100 years ago. Computer hardware and software have evolved at a breakneck pace over the last 20 years. To expect that a software program developed nearly a decade ago will protect you is absurd.

Looking at this chart you will notice 20K threats in 2002. The software that we are talking about here was built to protect you from viruses based on the threat landscape of the early 2000 period. Now look at the numbers for 2008, with nearly 2 million threats per year.  For 2010 that number is even greater. The AV engine technology  in older AV software is no defense against todays threats.

Users need to be aware that to stay protected, they need to stay current in their AV solution.

As a possible solution, take a look at PC Tools free AntVirus. BTW, PCT is owned by Symantec.

http://free.pctools.com/free-antivirus/

Cheers,
Thomas

Can you imagine the hue and cry of "they're forcing us to update!" if definition updates suddenly had stopped working when End of Life hit five years ago, after users had paid for another year of definition subscription or support?  When home users are asked to re-up their subscriptions, when enterprise users are asked to renew their support contract, I am quite sure that they are being advised (with offers on the website and/or information from their Sales representative) about new versions with added functionality are available, and being advsed that support is no longer available on a version they're using and ostensibly renewing.  Information on supportability and end of life is available on the website, and has been available for 3-5 years after the end of the product's life.  I know this doesn't seem adequate to you, but I think it's fair to say that attempts to inform had been made.

I'm sure there are situations -- demonstrated here and on other threads -- where this has put some people using legacy software in a tight spot.  I am not unsympathetic, truly.  If Auto-Protect is still functioning (try dropping an eicar string on one of those machines), then the machine is not completely unprotected.  However, that definitions continued to work correctly so long after support for the product had officially ended despite NOT being tested with those older systems for that entire time is extremely lucky.

But enough of this--we're going around in circles here, and not getting anywhere.  I'm not sure what more I can possibly say.  You seem determined to defend the use of outdated and unsupported software and deny that the threat landscape has changed over the last 10 years despite being given evidence to the contrary.  Look to the two other threads on this subject for other comments from Symantec employees--I only speak from my experience as a tech support representative who is used to giving customers recommendations on security settings.  I am by no means THE voice of Symantec, and I don't pretend to be.

Regards,
sandra

Sandra,

Your right, were going in circles.

Hopefully all this stink has been loud enough that the people still running the unsupported products will learn that their schedulded scans are not doing anything for them.

Cheers!

ThatOldITGuy.

ah, now we're having fun....  Have you actually looked at an old combustion engine?  I can tell you that the engine in my first car, a 1957 chevy looked very different than that of a 2010 model.  I could actually work on the 1957 engine and did!  I wouldn't know where to begin on the 2010 model.  If your over 40 you probably know what I mean, and can appreciate how well the analogy actually rings true.  If your under 40 you probably are content with leasing your cars and throwing away your iPhone when the screen gets cracked..  They tell me that's progress.... but is it really?

Recognizing that I will eventually have to use a "Modern" AV system I've been lurking around the SEP forums.  Guess what - this "Modern" AV system isn't working so well against the FAKE AV attacks and others unless you dial up the system to a point where you can't even run notepad or your computer is so slow you wouldn't want to.  Is that really progress?  Because I've been relying on a unsupported definition file based protection I've had to limit my exposure to the other threat vectors using other means, including limiting internet access in general.  By using this strategy I've remained virus free for years.  I am current supporting SEP via SEPM at one of my sites.  I've had to turn off the firewall policy because of performance and still have users that stumble into FAKE AV sites.  About 10% of my fleet is now SEP based and I can honestly say I dont feel any better off with it.  But hey, I know my SEPM is more secure because the username is case sensitive!  Is that really progress?

ThatOldITGuy.
 

Wait a minute. When you say loyal customer, then I take it that you are telling us your support contract is current and paid in full for another year and you are still using SAV 8? If that's the case, then you have full access to the latest version of SEP 11 free of charge. Download and install it, it won't cost you a penny to do so.

If you don't have a current support contract, then with all due respect I'm sorry to inform you, you are not, and have not been a loyal customer for at least 8 or 9 years and have been using the software free of charge for that period of time. As far as not alerting you ahead of time. As Sandra said above in a earlier post, warnings were provided on the website years ago. Additionally, the SAV 8 program wasn't designed to handle the size of the definitions files that are being used today, quite frankly the people still using it are lucky it held out this long. SAV 8 wasn't broken on purpose on the 11th. It simply finally reached it's breaking point. Somthing that should have happened years ago to be honest.

I can only make this work for a manual scan.  Scheduled scans still fail for me.

This might save you some typing:

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

this:

Now is a great time to try the latest software from Symantec. Compare these features and the level of protection to your old outdated AV.  I think the information below speaks for its self.

http://www.symantec.com/norton/downloads/trialsoftware/index.jsp

Norton 360™ Version 4.0

Key Technologies

Boy, with all those "security features" it must require a hex-a-core cpu, 16gb of ram and take a healthy toll on the available resources!  The Ultimate "All-in-one" that does everything!  How do you think it will run on my fleet of 500mhz Pentium II laptops with 6gb hdd and 384 mb of ram?

Sorry, you couldnt give me this product, and its the first thing I remove when I'm "fixing" a slow or infected computer.  There must be a market for it, but I wouldnt know where.

ThatOldITGuy.

Minimum Hardware Requirements

• 300 MHz or faster processor

• 256 MB of RAM (*512 MB RAM required for Recovery Tool

• 300 MB of available hard disk space

• CD-ROM or DVD drive (if not installing via electronic download)

Windows  Requirements

• Microsoft® Windows® XP (32-bit) with Service Pack 2 or later Home/Professional/Media Center
• Microsoft® Windows Vista® (32-bit and 64-bit) Starter/Home Basic/Home Premium/Business /Ultimate
• Microsoft® Windows® 7 (32-bit and 64-bit) Starter/ Home Basic/Home Premium/Professional/Ultimate

I run this product on my personal 8 year old AMD 1ghz and 1gig of ram with no issues.

yea but.... do you actually do any serious work on that system?

Kinda ironic isn't it? Your AMD computer, a complex system of hardware, firmware and software that is 8 years old is still working.  But if it was made by Symantec the LiveUdate process would have disabled the bootstrap on May 11, 2010 with some kind of strange message that reads "Boot stopped by user".

Surely something as old as 8 years can't still be expected to work by a Symantec Employee?

Say it isn't so....



 

Only the processor and MB are 8 years old. New case with power supply, New CPU fan , additional cooling fans, added memory, and new 300g hard drive. My point was that the new Norton product is less resource intensive and is compatible with older systems. It was designed this way to accommodate the older systems that many residential users still own.

I have been using Symantec AntiVirus Corporate Edition since 2006.  I have been running LiveUpdate regularly and have scheduled scans that keep me safe...or so I thought.  Personally, I don't go on Symantec's website regularly.  Why is this important?  Because I couldn't figure out why my scans weren't running. 

" 'Scan stopped by user.'   'LIAR!' " 
(this has been happening for days)   
Now I have found out why. 

As Symantec's crew has repeatedly stated, I should be happy with the life i got out of the software.  And I am!  HOWEVER...why wasn't this made more clear?  How was I supposed to know that for the past few years when LiveUpdate shows me downloading and installing "AVEngine" updates, that it wasn't actually updating my software?  Perhaps I am too naive for this discussion, but I'm sure that I am not the only one.  And that's my point.  How many of us are out there that truly don't know that we aren't being properly protected?  But I digress...

The fact of the matter is, why wasn't I told?  At the very least,  when my version was finally so old that it stopped being able to scan, why was i STILL not notified?  Instead, I received misleading error messages causing me to believe that something/someone was hijacking my antivirus software.  This whole thing seems like one big mistake on both the user's part AND the manufacturer's part.  Personally, I had no idea that i had to regularly visit Symantec's website to find out the end of my virus protection's life.  Again, maybe I am just too naive.