nod32

[Dennisthemenace]

The EULA says it will be passed on to third parties, not kept in the Eset family home.

You are agreeing to allow the computer and/or platform on which the Licensed Program is installed to send this information to Licensor, to allow Licensor to collect such information and to share this information with trusted third parties.

Eset and their own labs are the same people (the licensor), they are Eset. The reply you recieved goes to great depth as to what they do within Eset.

Not a mention though about the third party mentioned in the EULA that gets the information, which raises suspicions. All reference to that subject is just not there. Because of that it's within reason to ask who, what, where, and most important, why?

As i bought the software i want to know

 

[Scream]

I've got sick and tired of NOD32 over the past few months and I'm thinking about not renewing my license when it up in a few months.

NOD32 may have a great heuristics but thats about it. The number of systems have seen that NOD32 says is clean but infact infected is a joke.

For the past two years i've been using Kaspersky and its been the best av I've used to date and is highly regarded as the best in the business. Kaspersky has been using extended database to allow the detection of malware etc long long ago and NOD32 are only really newbies in that field.

I've been working with Kaspersky testing their beta versions of Kaspersky Antivirus v6 and so far its been remarkable.

Those looking for a new antivirus should wait till kav6 is fully released but if not, get kav5 as you won't be disappointed.

Since i'm a Kaspersky & NOD32 user and have been using both now for the past two years, I can honestly say NOD32 is over hyped and doesn't put a patch on Kaspersky. Ok, NOD32 imo is the 2nd best av out there at the minute but the only thing I find good about it is the low memory use and its heuristics.

 

[Dennisthemenace]

One of the reasons I said that NOD32 is flawed and can never be installed on computers used by those that are running servers, work computers, or network computers and the like is simple, the upload capabilities can lead to court appearances if enabled. The information on other people is protected information under the Data Protection Act. Even the humble email is covered. The moment Nod32 identifies a file containing personal information on another person and uploads it, the Data Protection Act is contravened. The same law that governs banks, hospitals, doctors, server operators, etcetera, also covers every single computer in the country. Most professional workstations can never install that pile of junk on their computers without disabling part of it. Those that use their computer as a business or workstation not only run the risk of a prosecution by the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner, but the offence would probably end up in a prison sentence, or a fine up to many hundreds of thousands of pounds should they get caught with NOD32 fully operational. Nod32 is nothing more than a pile of junk that should be put in the nearest dustbin by anyone using a computer in a professional capacity. Agreeing to the EULA would be the most foolhardy thing to do. Most bussines people would walk away if they knew the contract involed information being uploaded to others. If anyone found out that their private and privileged details were being shared with others, they could also bring a claim in court for damages. The only way to make it legal is to have an agreement like the outrageous EULA in NOD32. and not many people would ask their customers if they would mind if they run a program that uploads bank or credit card details or confidential work files to someone the've never met.

 

[SiriusB]

The fact that this feature can be turned off doesn't appear to have made it across to you yet. Turn off the early warning system and problem solved.

Calling NOD32 junk is just you being ignorant. NOD32 is a very capable anti-virus and betters Norton, McAffee and many others in terms of detection, speed and amount of resources it uses.

In order to quickly catch new viruses NOD32 has a system whereby any perceived threat not found in it's definitions can be sent to Eset to see if there is a new virus or whether it is a false-positive. Eset tells you that all or part of your affected file may be uploaded to Eset as part of the system. It is an unescapable side-effect of the system and Eset recognise that and have warned it's users.

The vast majority of users don't have any data that would be remotely meaningful to anyone else. However, should you have important and private data on your PC you can quite easily turn off this early warning system.

If you are a responsible admin you would read everything you possibly could about a piece of software and spend time configuring the software to suit your needs and situation. If you have sensitive information then you would turn off any feature that involves uploading data from your machines. NOD32 lets you do that.

I have used many AV programs over the years and NOD32 is easily the best one I have ever used and I gladly pay for it. Many other people would whole-heartedly agree with me.

SiriusB

 

[Ratbag]

Okay because my previous post seems to have been ignored, I'll post the relevant portion of the help file here. Dennisthemenace, take note:

The ThreatSense.Net Early Warning System has a single purpose - to improve the protection that we can offer you, our customer. The best way to ensure that we see new threats as soon as they appear is to "link" to as many of our customers as possible and use them as our Threat Scouts. There are two options: You can decide not to enable the ThreatSense.Net Early Warning System. You won't lose any functionality in the software, and you'll still get the best protection that we can offer. You can enable Early Warning System to submit anonymous information about new threats, and where the new threatening code is contained in a file, the whole file can be sent to Eset for detailed analysis. Studying these threats will help Eset update its threat detection capabilities. The ThreatSense.Net Early Warning System will collect information about your computer related to newly detected threats, which may include a sample or copy of the file in which the threat appeared, the path to that file, its filename, information about the date and time, the process by which the threat appeared on your computer and information about your computer's operating system. Some of this information may include personal information about the user of the computer, for instance usernames in the path etc. An example of the file information submitted is available here:

# utc_time=2005-04-14 07:21:28
# country="Slovakia"
# language="ENGLISH"
# osver=5.1.2600 NT
# engine=5417
# components=2.50.2
# moduleid=0x4e4f4d41
# filesize=28368
# filename=C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\C14J8NS7\rdgFR1463[1].exe


While there is a chance that on occasion this may disclose some information about you or your computer to our threat lab at Eset, our intention is not to gather that information for any other purpose than to ensure that we can respond immediately to new threats. We're telling you this up-front, and you have several options so you can be sure that we take your privacy very seriously. By default NOD32 is set to ask you if you'd like to submit the suspicious file for detailed analysis to Eset's threat lab. Furthermore files with certain extensions like .doc or .xls are always excluded from having their contents included, should a threat be detected in them. You can add other extensions so that if there are files that you or your company wants to particularly avoid ever sending, you may be sure they will be untouched. We hope that you will help us better protect your computers by using the ThreatSense.Net Early Warning System Technology and be a part of making the Internet a safer place.

This will hopefully put to rest the theory that NOD is some kind of sinister spyware....

 

[SiriusB]

Okay because my previous post seems to have been ignored, I'll post the relevant portion of the help file here. Dennisthemenace, take note:

<snip>

This will hopefully put to rest the theory that NOD is some kind of sinister spyware....

I would consider this discussion closed. Good job Ratbag

SiriusB

 

[bledd]

nod32 is really awesome

i wish they bucked up their spyware detection side of it tho, spybot + adaware find a ton more spyware than nod does!

 

[Dennisthemenace]

While there is a chance that on occasion this may disclose some information about you or your computer to our threat lab at Eset, our intention is not to gather that information for any other purpose than to ensure that we can respond immediately to new threats. We're telling you this up-front, and you have several options so you can be sure that we take your privacy very seriously. By default NOD32 is set to ask you if you'd like to submit the suspicious file for detailed analysis to Eset's threat lab. Furthermore files with certain extensions like .doc or .xls are always excluded from having their contents included, should a threat be detected in them. You can add other extensions so that if there are files that you or your company wants to particularly avoid ever sending, you may be sure they will be untouched. We hope that you will help us better protect your computers by using the ThreatSense.Net Early Warning System Technology and be a part of making the Internet a safer place.

That part breaks the Data Protection Act, it's illegal. I don't know how to put it any stronger without lowering myself to the same level of communictation as SiriusB. They may bypass word and excel extensions, but most companies use their own database programs with their own extensions. Have a look at the computer the next time you go into a shop, the database and finance software will be unknown to you. It doesn't matter wether they take good care of the information, the act of permitting the upload is 100% illegal and can get a person or employee using the company network into serious trouble should it get noticed. It isn't the licensor that gets their day in court, it's the person allowing the information to be sent, the person using the computer for profesional reasons.

As for switching it off, too many people within this forum have said they don't mind the upload because "it's done to stop the spread of viruses". Do they know that it's illegal, i doubt it. Do they know that they alone will get bounced into court, not the licensor of the software. In america or wherever, it's probably legal, but we are not there, we are here, in the UK

Again i'll state "Agreeing to the EULA would be the most foolhardy thing to do." And for the person using their computer for proffesional reasons, Nod32 is nothing more than a pile of junk. And most would walk away from that pile of junk if they knew that the contract gives licensor the right to upload anything, even if they knew it had the off button. And that is just plain all garden good business sense.

As for SiriusB, perhaps now he's promised to ignore the thread the insults and thread trashing might stop.

 

[SiriusB]

That part breaks the Data Protection Act, it's illegal. I don't know how to put it any stronger without lowering myself to the same level of communictation as SiriusB. They may bypass word and excel extensions, but most companies use their own database programs with their own extensions. Have a look at the computer the next time you go into a shop, the database and finance software will be unknown to you. It doesn't matter wether they take good care of the information, the act of permitting the upload is 100% illegal and can get a person or employee using the company network into serious trouble should it get noticed. It isn't the licensor that gets their day in court, it's the person allowing the information to be sent, the person using the computer for profesional reasons.

As for switching it off, too many people within this forum have said they don't mind the upload because "it's done to stop the spread of viruses". Do they know that it's illegal, i doubt it. Do they know that they alone will get bounced into court, not the licensor of the software. In america or wherever, it's probably legal, but we are not there, we are here, in the UK

Again i'll state "Agreeing to the EULA would be the most foolhardy thing to do." And for the person using their computer for proffesional reasons, Nod32 is nothing more than a pile of junk. And most would walk away from that pile of junk if they knew that the contract gives licensor the right to upload anything, even if they knew it had the off button. And that is just plain all garden good business sense.

As for SiriusB, perhaps now he's promised to ignore the thread the insults and thread trashing might stop.

See now what was the point of that last sentence? Or indeed the second sentence of your post. We are conducting a debate and for you to insult me at the start and end of your post is immature and does nothing for your arguments.

I am not going to say anymore on this matter since I do not see the need for me to reciprocate to something I hope was written spontaneously and without due consideration. I am quite happy to continue this discussion with yourself and others.

SiriusB

 

[Mr Blonde]

Dennisthemennace,

Why don't you post your concern over on the Wilders Security Forums, in the NOD32 v2 forum : http://www.wilderssecurity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=16

I for one would be interested to see what they have to say on the matter.

 

[Richdog]

Dennisthemennace,

Why don't you post your concern over on the Wilders Security Forums, in the NOD32 v2 forum : http://www.wilderssecurity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=16

I for one would be interested to see what they have to say on the matter.

I second that, it's the only way i'll give him some credence.

 

[Jeff Crawly]

I think the management features of the Antivirus servers are very useful, however im referring to the client which I think is poor.

With my experience the Symantec/Norton (whichever umbrella you give it) clients are very poor at picking up Trojans even thought the .dat files have been up to date and should have picked them up.

Often I would turn to using such things as the Mcafee Online Scan tool - even that would pick up certain trojans that the Symantec/Norton client would not. ( I cannot remember exact names of these Trojans as this was for my last company and I left there a while back).

We can only speak from our experiences..

Also the client is quite heavy on recources whereas NOD32 appears not to be.

Sorry but this post clearly shows you know absolutely nothing about AV's

Are you honestly expecting people that work with AV's day-in-day-out to believe that Mcafee's virus defs are more comprehensive than Symantecs/Nortons!!
And as a matter of FACT a correctly set-up Nortons Corp v9 use's LESS system resources / clock cycles than NOD32.

 

[Richdog]

Sorry but this post clearly shows you know absolutely nothing about AV's

Are you honestly expecting people that work with AV's day-in-day-out to believe that Mcafee's virus defs are more comprehensive than Symantecs/Nortons!!
And as a matter of FACT a correctly set-up Nortons Corp v9 use's LESS system resources / clock cycles than NOD32.

I think it's a bit of an exaggeration to say he knows nothing, so please lose the rolleyes smileys it's just silly.

As to whether norton corp is less resource hungry than NOD32 if that is true then fine, but please provide links to proof of this rather than just your word.

 

[Mohain]

umm you say that NOD32 is slightly behind Kapersky yet you prefer NOD32 , any reasons ?

I used to use Kapersky and have moved to NOD32. Kapersky used to take aaaaggggeeessssss at start up and lock-up the PC until it was updated and happy. I hardly notice a thing now with NOD32, loads faster.

 

[Dennisthemenace]

See now what was the point of that last sentence? Or indeed the second sentence of your post. We are conducting a debate and for you to insult me at the start and end of your post is immature and does nothing for your arguments.

I am not going to say anymore on this matter since I do not see the need for me to reciprocate to something I hope was written spontaneously and without due consideration. I am quite happy to continue this discussion with yourself and others.

SiriusB

You have a problem with facts. Firstly, when I raised the question of the EULA that everyone has to agree with, you came out with “You can remove the tin foil hat now”. Why you had to come out with that insult is beyond me, but it meant I had to defend myself. There was no cause or justification for it. Then, when posted the EULA, You had to do it again, you had to throw another insult, and again I was forced to defend myself. There was no way you could justify “He was asking for proof that your goat porn”, so why you had to throw it is beyond me. Even your last post had to contain an offensive remark that was aimed at me and was uncalled for, there was no justification for “Calling NOD32 junk is just you being ignorant”.

When I said As for SiriusB, perhaps now he's promised to ignore the thread the insults and thread trashing might stop I had no choice because of your continual offensive remarks that were directly aimed at me. In this case, I meant every single word. I can’t stop you throwing those offensive remarks at me, but don’t ever think I won’t defend myself against every one. Don’t ever think that because you would be very, very wrong.

In this thread there have been people that have disagreed with each other, but not one has stooped to your level, not one.

To get back on topic. If I walked up to a company man with the most awesome anti viral program on the planet, and handed him a contract with the EULA on it they would walk away, maybe even run. To sign that document is to say that they are prepared to allow private company records to be uploaded to another company. If he said yes ok I’ll do it he would probably get fired. If he signed it and the DPA people found out, he would get a visit from the DPA people. Now those guys have awesome powers, and I mean awesome. Firstly they would snoop his computer with a fine tooth comb. Now this man is a company man using his computer on a company mainframe. The DPA people would be duty bound to go to the company and snoop those computer as well. They have to check that this guy is unique, and that those within the company with this program have never uploaded any material covered by the DPA.
This isn’t fantasy, it isn’t dream world stuff, the moment the guy signed that document he runs the risk of a swoop by the DPA. Whether or not the upload element is disabled, the signing of that document saying he’s willing to do it is enough to kick-start everything. When a person downloads NOD 32 and installs it they sign that piece of paper. And no matter how remote this all is, the threat is there. It would be foolish for any man with a computer that is used for database or spreadsheets to agree to that EULA. That EULA makes the software one with risks, and not many would want to risk the awesome powers of the DPA. That software is a pile of junk to every doctor, accountant, or person on a company network, etcetera. It’s a pile of junk because that stupid EULA make makes it so.

 

[Caged]

Dude if you get offended by that you really need to disconnect your internet and never return.

 

[Dennisthemenace]

I'm not the one who's complaining

 

[SiriusB]

Just to clear some things up. Firstly I never said anything about a tin foil hat. That was someone else. Secondly the "goat porn" remark was just a follow on to someone else mentioning goat porn. It was said in jest and was not intended as a personal insult. I only wish I added a few smileys to make it clear I was only joking.

As for saying you were ignorant I stand by that as a statement of fact rather than as an insult. You said NOD32 should be binned and is useless etc. This is blatantly untrue. Yes there are questions as to some of its features, but this does not make NOD32 a bad AV.

The tin foil hat remark was not me, you misinterpreted a joke and took offence to me saying you were ignorant. I will apologise now for the misinterpreted joke as that was supposed to be humour. It was my mistake to assume you would see it as a joke.

I hope this has cleared the air as I do not wish to fall out with anyone on these forums.

SiriusB

 

[Dennisthemenace]

Actually i said that to anyone using that pile of junk on a computer being used as a workstaion by profesional people it's nothing more than a pile of junk. People who collect data on people are registered with the DPA people as a data controler The DPA guys both control and regulate that list. If any data controller signed up to a contract like the EULA in NOD32 they run a very strong risk of having their data controller ticket taken away. Those guys have more authority than the police, and more authority than the crown procecution service in everything computers. they can fold up a company with fines and legal costs. Those people can do things that would boggle your mind

My information comes from computer based qualifications that included having the Data Protection Act and the DPA people shoved up my my bugle for five months. Saying that the program is a pile of junk to profesional computer users isn't being ignorant, it's someone who knows the Data Protection Act inside out, and recognises what can happen to a data handler that agrees to the contract needed to install it. It's a contract between an antivirus company and a victim.

As for those comments, i'm to stupid or thick to hold grudges. As for the the " you can take off the tin foil hat now", it wasn't you and i would apologise if i knew how to spell it. It was made by another guy in the thread, the one with lobotomy problems



Those

 

[Mr Blonde]

I'm sure most of us are after a suitable conclusion to this. I am uninterested in the nit picking, back chat and one-up-manship going on here though. So again, can I recommend that this get posted on the Wilders forums so that the powers that be over there can give it their considered thought. Dennis, if you don't want to do this for whatever reason I will, but it would sound much better comming from yourself as you can back it up with your exstensive knowledge in this area.