News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Symantec's Bad Week. Parent comment

Re:Symantec's Bad Week by technion on Saturday July 09, 2016 @02:11AM (#12060343)
It doesn't satisfy my auditors. Who can't seem to explain why ("it's not on the list of boxes I can tick"), other than to direct us to the big four of McAfee/Sophos/Kaspersky/Symantec.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Symantec's Bad Week by reitanqild on Saturday July 09, 2016 @04:02AM (#12060623)
Also some versions of ssl vpns scan your computer and I'm not sure if all of them accept the built in MS antivirus.

(Protip: run such connections in a VM. This has a number of benefits:

* when they require a full scan it takes next to no time as the vm is almost empty

* when they cut off the rest of your network except for their site you can still reach google or your company server in the host machine.

* who honestly wants to run all those weird drivers on their day-to-day dev or sysadmin machine?

)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Symantec's Bad Week by justinlardinois on Saturday July 09, 2016 @03:27PM (#12062881)
I'm guessing that's due a combination of tradition (Security Essentials hasn't been around as long as the rest) and possibly having business connections with those antivirus companies.

Disappointing either way.

[ Parent | on HN ]