Editing Norton Internet Security (section)

==Criticism of versions before 2009==
===FBI cooperation===

Symantec, in compliance with the [[Federal Bureau of Investigation]] (FBI), whitelisted [[Magic Lantern (spyware)|Magic Lantern]], an FBI [[Keystroke logging|keylogger]]. The purpose of Magic Lantern was to obtain passwords to encrypted e-mail as part of a criminal investigation. Magic Lantern was first reported on November 20, 2001.<ref>Ted Bridis. "FBI Develops Eavesdropping Tools," ''[[Washington Post]]'', November 22, 2001.</ref> Magic Lantern was deployed as an [[e-mail attachment]]. When the attachment was opened, a [[trojan horse (computing)|trojan horse]] was installed on the suspect's computer. The Trojan horse was activated when the suspect used [[Pretty Good Privacy|PGP]] encryption, often used to increase the security of sent e-mail messages. When activated, the trojan horse logged the PGP password, which  allowed the FBI to decrypt user communications.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa121401a.htm |title=FBI Has a Magic Lantern |publisher=Usgovinfo.about.com |access-date=2009-02-23}}</ref> Symantec and other major antivirus vendors whitelisted Magic Lantern. Concerns included uncertainties about Magic Lantern's full potential and whether hackers could subvert it for purposes outside the law.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://utopia.csis.pace.edu/dps/2007/jkile/2005%20-%20Spring/DCS823/Spyware/01016895.pdf |title=Invasive Software: Who's Inside Your Computer? |access-date=2009-03-12 |author=George Lawton |date=July 2002 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110720024630/http://utopia.csis.pace.edu/dps/2007/jkile/2005%20-%20Spring/DCS823/Spyware/01016895.pdf |archive-date=2011-07-20 }}</ref>

Graham Cluley, a technology consultant from [[Sophos]], said, "We have no way of knowing if it was written by the FBI, and even if we did, we wouldn't know whether it was being used by the FBI or if it had been commandeered by a third party".<ref>{{cite web|last=Jackson |first=William |url=http://www.gcn.com/online/vol1_no1/17572-1.html |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120910214651/http://www.gcn.com/online/vol1_no1/17572-1.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=2012-09-10 |title=Antivirus vendors are wary of FBI's Magic Lantern |publisher=1105 Media, Inc. |date=2001-12-06 |access-date=2009-02-23 }}</ref> Another reaction came from Marc Maiffret, [[chief technical officer]] and cofounder of eEye Digital Security, "Our customers are paying us for a service, to protect them from all forms of malicious code. It is not up to us to do law enforcement's job for them so we do not, and will not, make any exceptions for law enforcement malware or other tools."<ref>{{cite web|last=McCullagh |first=Declan |author2=Broache, Anne | title=Will security firms detect police spyware? | url=http://news.cnet.com/2100-7348-6197020.html?tag=tb | publisher=CNET| date= July 17, 2007 | access-date=2009-03-27}}</ref>

FBI spokesman Paul Bresson, in response to the question of whether Magic Lantern needed a court order to be deployed, said, "Like all technology projects or tools deployed by the FBI it would be used pursuant to the appropriate legal process."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.si.umich.edu/~rfrost/courses/SI110/readings/Privacy/Magic_Lantern.pdf |title=FBI Confirms 'Magic Lantern' Project Exists |access-date=2009-03-12 |author=Elinor Mills Abreu |publisher=At Home Corporation |date=December 31, 2001 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110720091820/http://rfrost.people.si.umich.edu/courses/SI110/readings/Privacy/Magic_Lantern.pdf |archive-date=July 20, 2011 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Woo |first=Christopher |author2=So, Miranda  |title=The case for magic lantern: september 11 highlights the need for increased surveillance  |url=http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v15/15HarvJLTech521.pdf |year=2002 |publisher=Harvard Journal of Law & Technology |access-date=2009-06-12}}</ref>

Proponents of Magic Lantern argue the technology would allow law enforcement to efficiently and quickly decrypt messages protected by encryption schemes. Unlike a predecessor, [[Carnivore (software)|Carnivore]], implementing Magic Lantern does not require physical access to a suspect's computer, which would necessitate a court order.

===Uninstallation===
Older versions of Norton were defective. In the 2009 versions, Symantec added [[Norton Removal Tool]], which removed their products, usually in less than a minute. The tool could be downloaded from Symantec's website.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.symantec.com/nrt|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110902115255/http://www.symantec.com/nrt/|url-status=dead|title=Symantec's website|archivedate=September 2, 2011}}</ref>

===Windows Service Packs===
When [[Norton Internet Security 2008]] was installed, users encountered incompatibilities upgrading to [[Windows XP Service Pack 3]] or [[Windows Vista Service Pack 1]]. Users reported invalid [[Windows Registry|registry]] keys added by a tool named fixcss.exe, resulting in an empty Device Manager and missing devices such as wireless network adapters.<ref name="Sym">{{cite web|title=FAQ: Upgrading to Windows XP Service Pack 3 or Windows Vista Service Pack 1 with your Norton 2008 product installed |url=http://solutions.symantec.com/sdccommon/asp/symcu_defcontent_view.asp?sprt_cid=b32555cd-1b26-4041-abac-882faf8d365f |publisher=Symantec Corporation |date=4 August 2008 |access-date=2009-03-28 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090325215843/http://solutions.symantec.com/sdccommon/asp/symcu_defcontent_view.asp?sprt_cid=b32555cd-1b26-4041-abac-882faf8d365f |archive-date=25 March 2009 }}</ref> Symantec initially blamed Microsoft for the incompatibilities but accepted partial responsibility.

Dave Cole, Symantec's Vice President & General Manager,<ref name="Symantec's Vice President & General Manager">{{Cite web|url=http://www.symantec.com/about/news/resources/press_kits/bio.jsp?bioid=dave_cole|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070305045330/http://www.symantec.com/about/news/resources/press_kits/bio.jsp?bioid=dave_cole|url-status=dead|archive-date=March 5, 2007|title=Dave Cole|publisher=Symantec|access-date=2013-08-10}}</ref> acknowledged that users running Norton products were experiencing problems, but said the numbers were small. Cole said that Symantec had done "extensive testing" of its products with Windows XP SP3, but this issue was not encountered. Cole blamed Microsoft "This is related to XP SP3." Microsoft recommended that users contact Windows customer support.<ref name="Gregg">{{Cite news|url=http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9088598/ |title=Symantec pins blame for XP SP3 registry corruption on Microsoft |publisher=Computerworld Inc. |author=Gregg Keizer |date=2008-05-23 |access-date=2008-06-19 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090122232705/http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9088598%2F |archive-date=2009-01-22 }}</ref> To resolve the problem, Symantec issued a fix intended for users before upgrading.<ref name="Sym"/> Symantec recommended disabling the tamper protection component in the 2008 release, dubbed SymProtect. A tool to remove the added registry entries was available from Symantec.<ref name="Sym"/>

===Windows Vista===
Sarah Hicks, Symantec's vice president of consumer product management, voiced concern over Windows Vista 64-bit's [[Kernel Patch Protection|PatchGuard]] feature. PatchGuard was designed by Microsoft to ensure the integrity of the [[kernel (operating system)|kernel]], a part of an [[operating system]] which interacts with the hardware. [[Rootkit]]s often hide in an operating system's kernel, complicating removal.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://ericuday.googlepages.com/EKumar_Rootkits.pdf |title=Battle with the Unseen–Understanding Rootkits on Windows |access-date=2009-03-15 |author=Eric Uday Kumar |publisher=Association of Anti-Virus Asia Researchers |year=2006 |archive-date=2010-01-20 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100120023038/http://ericuday.googlepages.com/EKumar_Rootkits.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref> Mike Dalton, European president of [[McAfee]] said, "The decision to build a wall around the kernel with the assumption it can't be breached is ridiculous", claiming Microsoft was preventing security vendors from effectively protecting the kernel while promoting its own security product, [[Windows Live OneCare]]. Hicks said Symantec did not mind the competition from OneCare.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.forbes.com/2006/10/05/symantec-virus-microsoft-tech-cx_ll_1006symantec.html |title=Symantec Snaps At Microsoft |access-date=2009-03-11 |author=Lisa Lerer |work=Forbes |date=October 10, 2006 }}</ref> Symantec later published a white paper detailing PatchGuard with instructions to obtain a PatchGuard exploit.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/reference/Security_Implications_of_Windows_Vista.pdf |title=Security Implications of Windows Vista |access-date=2009-03-11 |publisher=Symantec Corporation |archive-date=2008-12-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081207170756/http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/reference/Security_Implications_of_Windows_Vista.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref> After negotiations and investigations from antitrust regulators, Microsoft decided to allow security vendors access to the kernel by creating special [[Application programming interface|API]] instructions.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUSTRE4AI0M020081119 |title=Microsoft to offer free security software |access-date=2009-03-14 |author=Gabriel Madway |publisher=Thomson Reuters |date=November 18, 2008 }}</ref>