Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Last Norton Liveupdate Broke Firewall!

Last response: in Networking
Share
May 13, 2004 3:10:12 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

Immedietly after doing the last Norton Liveupdate, my firewall became
broken.

The problem is with the file IAMAPP.EXE

Upon startup, if Norton Firewall is set to "Load at Startup" then it hangs.
If Norton Firewall is set to "Load Manually", everything loads fine -- but
when Norton Firewall is manually enabled it will only work for a couple
minutes before it hangs. (Sometimes giving a "C++ Runtime Error" dialogue
box for IAMAPP.EXE)

Anyone know what the deal is here? This only started immedietly after the
last Liveupdate (which consisted of a large Norton Firewall update). The
first instance was right after Liveupdate had you reboot for changes to take
effect. Any fix, besides uninstalling and re-installing Norton Firewall --
as whats to say that it won't just do the same thing?

WinXP
Norton SystemWorks and Firewall 2002
(Norton SW and Firewall 2002 have worked flawlessly with XP for the last
couple years, up until now. "Upgrading" to Norton SW and Firewall 2004
isn't an option -- as Norton didn't hesitate to take my money for a
Liveupdate subscription for this year, using SW/Firewall 2002.)
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 3:40:32 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

JasonL said in news:10a73unqnsaia68@corp.supernews.com:
> Immedietly after doing the last Norton Liveupdate, my firewall became
> broken.
>
> The problem is with the file IAMAPP.EXE
>
> Upon startup, if Norton Firewall is set to "Load at Startup" then it
> hangs. If Norton Firewall is set to "Load Manually", everything loads
> fine -- but when Norton Firewall is manually enabled it will only
> work for a couple minutes before it hangs. (Sometimes giving a "C++
> Runtime Error" dialogue box for IAMAPP.EXE)
>
> Anyone know what the deal is here? This only started immedietly
> after the last Liveupdate (which consisted of a large Norton Firewall
> update). The first instance was right after Liveupdate had you
> reboot for changes to take effect. Any fix, besides uninstalling and
> re-installing Norton Firewall -- as whats to say that it won't just
> do the same thing?
>
> WinXP
> Norton SystemWorks and Firewall 2002
> (Norton SW and Firewall 2002 have worked flawlessly with XP for the
> last couple years, up until now. "Upgrading" to Norton SW and
> Firewall 2004 isn't an option -- as Norton didn't hesitate to take my
> money for a Liveupdate subscription for this year, using SW/Firewall
> 2002.)

I have Norton Internet Security 2003. It does not have IAMAPP.EXE.
There is an IAMAPP.DLL file. This version changed to using SYMMONI.EXE
as the executable to load the program. The prior version had the
IAMAPP.EXE that you mention. I don't know if they went back to using it
in NIS2004. My 2003 version is already out of date and unsupported (but
its subscription goes until May 2005 and this may be the last version of
their product that I bother with). I suspect you have NIS2002 or
earlier and is also not supported. The subscription only covers the
signature updates. Makes me wonder if their update doesn't take into
account the components for too-old versions. Have your continually
reran LiveUpdate until it longer offers more updates? Symantec
developers don't seem to coordinate too well in organizing the hierarchy
and dependencies of their patches so you have to run LiveUpdate, it
lists a dozen updates and although all seem to download only a few get
applied, so you have to run LiveUpdate again (usually after a forced
reboot), and repeat until LiveUpdate finds no more updates.

LiveUpdate cannot update itself so you must download the newest version
from their web site. Maybe a new version will recognize the correct
component versions to download to match your old version. Eventually
their products get so screwed up that even they recommend a complete
uninstall and reinstall. Use their 'rnav' and 'rnis' removal tools
after an uninstall to thoroughly clean your system before the reinstall.

--
____________________________________________________________
*** Post replies to newsgroup. Share with others.
*** Email: domain = ".com" and append "=NEWS=" to Subject.
____________________________________________________________
May 13, 2004 4:49:43 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

After doing a couple re-installs (and redownloading updates), I believe I
found what the problem was.

(Perhaps this might help someone else later.)

Before you download and install the latest Liveupdate patch (which upgrades
Norton Firewall to v4.0.2.3), make sure that WinXP's firewall is disabled.
(Same as how Symantec advises you to turn it off before installing Norton.)

When I re-installed Norton (turning XP's firewall for the install, but
re-enabled it prior to Liveupdate patches), it led to the same problems as
having before. When I re-installed Norton (turning off XP's firewall and
keeping it disabled for patches), everything worked like it should.

Suppose re-enabling XP's firewall after doing the Liveupdates shouldn't
hurt.

Future note for myself, disable XP's firewall before doing updates.
Especially if its a "version update".
Related resources
May 13, 2004 5:38:18 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

Thanks for the detailed reply. Got everything working and up to date after
finding the conflict.
(XP's built-in firewall had to be disabled before installing latest update.)

Interesting about the 'LiveUpdate' upgrades though, having to d/l them from
the web site.

Now that everything is working great again, think I'll wait on that
though...
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 9:05:37 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

> Future note for myself, disable XP's firewall before doing updates.
> Especially if its a "version update".

Sorry, but why exactly do you have to firewalls running? There is no
real use in doing that...

Gerald
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 9:05:42 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

JasonL said in news:10a79padhu4idb@corp.supernews.com:
> After doing a couple re-installs (and redownloading updates), I
> believe I found what the problem was.
>
> (Perhaps this might help someone else later.)
>
> Before you download and install the latest Liveupdate patch (which
> upgrades Norton Firewall to v4.0.2.3), make sure that WinXP's
> firewall is disabled. (Same as how Symantec advises you to turn it
> off before installing Norton.)
>
> When I re-installed Norton (turning XP's firewall for the install, but
> re-enabled it prior to Liveupdate patches), it led to the same
> problems as having before. When I re-installed Norton (turning off
> XP's firewall and keeping it disabled for patches), everything worked
> like it should.
>
> Suppose re-enabling XP's firewall after doing the Liveupdates
> shouldn't hurt.
>
> Future note for myself, disable XP's firewall before doing updates.
> Especially if its a "version update".

Use only one firewall. Although you might be willing to manage the
rules or filtering for two firewalls, and even if they permit the same
traffic, they can and will interfere with each other. Same for
anti-virus software (unless you only use one of them as a scanning
application and never as a monitor and cleaner running in the
background).

More is not better. It is worse!


--
____________________________________________________________
*** Post replies to newsgroup. Share with others.
*** Email: domain = ".com" and append "=NEWS=" to Subject.
____________________________________________________________
May 13, 2004 10:38:07 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

> Use only one firewall. Although you might be willing to manage the
> rules or filtering for two firewalls, and even if they permit the same
> traffic, they can and will interfere with each other. Same for
> anti-virus software (unless you only use one of them as a scanning
> application and never as a monitor and cleaner running in the
> background).
>
> More is not better. It is worse!

Yes, I would agree that two software firewalls running on the same computer
wouldn't be a good idea. I certainly wouldn't try running two third-party
firewalls at the same time.

But, found in Symantec's Knowledge Base:
---
Windows XP Internet Connection Firewall:
Symantec recommends that the Windows XP (Home and Professional Editions)
Internet Connection Firewall (ICF) feature be disabled before installing NIS
or NPF. After the installation, the Windows XP firewall feature can be
enabled and will work with NIS and NPF.
---

Also, In another article from their knowledge base, they recommended keeping
WinXP's ICF enabled and allowing it to integrate with Norton. (?)

So, I enabled ICF...
May 13, 2004 10:41:56 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

I just took a look at the Liveupdate upgrades that could be downloaded from
Symantec's website. The most recent Liveupdate version is the same version
I have running now. Liveupdate is listed as one of the packages that can be
updated in Liveupdate itself. Apparently, Liveupdate must've updated
itself. (?)
May 13, 2004 10:55:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

I've also been "paranoid" that Liveupdate (for Norton 2002) would attempt to
upgrade with packages meant for 2004. The packages available for download
seems to always have a description for Norton 2002 though. I guess between
WinXP's last critical update and Norton 2002's most recent updates,
something funky caused some files to be corrupted. At least one another
person has already posted the exact same issue today. Re-installing and
then re-downloading all the updates (and going through like four reboots for
each update, LOL) seems to have fixed it though. Now the only "problem"
(not sure if it will be a problem yet) is that Windoctor is reporting that
the file "symneti.dll" is missing. This file is apparently used by a Norton
file called "SNDSrvc.exe". The other poster that posted about Norton giving
him the same exact problem as I saw today also posted about Windoctor
reporting this file missing. (He also was able to get NPF running again
after an un/re-install, but then ran Windoctor to discover this .dll being
listed as missing.) After reading his post, I ran Windoctor and got the
same exact report. Thought it might be a path issue, like the gapi32.dll
issue a while back, but the .dll is completetly gone. (Searched whole
computer, including hidden files.)

Oh well, everything "seems" to be working now anyway. :^)

Perhaps Symantec will address this .dll issue in the near future.

Thanks!
Anonymous
May 14, 2004 4:13:30 AM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

I had the same problem. Your problem is that Symantec detected you were
using NPF 2002 which THEY NO LONGER SUPPORT as of yesterday. I noticed that
when I disabled NPF everything worked fine including live update and getting
mail from my server. When I had symantec scan my system it told me that
they no longer support NPF2002. So I contacted symantec and informed them
that I had paid for subscriptions thru 12/02/04 and they suggested I upgrade
to NPF2004. At which point I contacted the Commonwealth Attorney's office
as Symanted sold me a service they had no intention of supporting. Last I
heard was that the Commonewealth Attorneys office was going to contact
symantec on this matter, and I've so informed Symantec in a follow up
conversation.

Meantime, as I do like the simplicity and way it integrates well with my
hardware firewall, I picked up a copy of NPF 2004, which, howerver strange
sounding, was on clearance for $24.95 at Target with a $20 upgrade rebate.

John
"JasonL" <jasolsspa@re.ms.move.n.com> wrote in message
news:10a73unqnsaia68@corp.supernews.com...
> Immedietly after doing the last Norton Liveupdate, my firewall became
> broken.
>
> The problem is with the file IAMAPP.EXE
>
> Upon startup, if Norton Firewall is set to "Load at Startup" then it
hangs.
> If Norton Firewall is set to "Load Manually", everything loads fine -- but
> when Norton Firewall is manually enabled it will only work for a couple
> minutes before it hangs. (Sometimes giving a "C++ Runtime Error" dialogue
> box for IAMAPP.EXE)
>
> Anyone know what the deal is here? This only started immedietly after the
> last Liveupdate (which consisted of a large Norton Firewall update). The
> first instance was right after Liveupdate had you reboot for changes to
take
> effect. Any fix, besides uninstalling and re-installing Norton
Firewall --
> as whats to say that it won't just do the same thing?
>
> WinXP
> Norton SystemWorks and Firewall 2002
> (Norton SW and Firewall 2002 have worked flawlessly with XP for the last
> couple years, up until now. "Upgrading" to Norton SW and Firewall 2004
> isn't an option -- as Norton didn't hesitate to take my money for a
> Liveupdate subscription for this year, using SW/Firewall 2002.)
>
>
Anonymous
May 14, 2004 1:30:32 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

"JRF" <bountyhunter@innocent.com> wrote in message
news:HHXoc.145626$f_5.37093@lakeread01...
> I had the same problem. Your problem is that Symantec detected you were
> using NPF 2002 which THEY NO LONGER SUPPORT as of yesterday. I noticed
that
> when I disabled NPF everything worked fine including live update and
getting
> mail from my server. When I had symantec scan my system it told me that
> they no longer support NPF2002. So I contacted symantec and informed them
> that I had paid for subscriptions thru 12/02/04 and they suggested I
upgrade
> to NPF2004. At which point I contacted the Commonwealth Attorney's office
> as Symanted sold me a service they had no intention of supporting. Last I
> heard was that the Commonewealth Attorneys office was going to contact
> symantec on this matter, and I've so informed Symantec in a follow up
> conversation.
>
> Meantime, as I do like the simplicity and way it integrates well with my
> hardware firewall, I picked up a copy of NPF 2004, which, howerver strange
> sounding, was on clearance for $24.95 at Target with a $20 upgrade rebate.

I've got a similar problem. I've been using NPF2003 and System Work 2003 on
a Windows 98 for the past year with no problems. Just recently renewed my
subscription and then a couple of weeks ago downloaded and installed an
update for NPF called Symantec Redirector. When computer was rebooted I got
this: "Windows Protection Error" and computer can't load SymTDI. If do a
selective startup and by-pass this or if I uninstall NPF then windows loads
and SW along with Norton Anti-Virus works fine.

I've followed directions from the Symantec site regarding
uninstalling/reinstalling to no avail. Yesterday I uninstalled everything
Symantec and then reinstalled NPF. Booted up fine. Then ran LiveUpdate and
downloaded only the Symantec Redirector. Immediately ran into the same
problem I had prior.

Currently I have both SW and NPF, minus the offending update, up and running
but NPF keeps telling me I need to download the offending update because the
new definitions can't be updated without it. In addition, Windoctor keeps
finding and repairing some missing Symantec files. Things appear to be
running OK but we'll see.

I've contacted Symantec support via email and heard back once with a very
generic response that didn't say anything that I hadn't already found on the
web site. In addition it plain and simple didn't fix anything. Haven't got
a reply to my second email. I have nearly a whole year left on my
subscription and I'm not a happy camper!!!

So, any idea how to fix this thing?
May 14, 2004 3:55:21 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

> I had the same problem. Your problem is that Symantec detected you were
> using NPF 2002 which THEY NO LONGER SUPPORT as of yesterday. I noticed
that
> when I disabled NPF everything worked fine including live update and
getting
> mail from my server. When I had symantec scan my system it told me that
> they no longer support NPF2002. So I contacted symantec and informed them
> that I had paid for subscriptions thru 12/02/04 and they suggested I
upgrade
> to NPF2004. At which point I contacted the Commonwealth Attorney's office
> as Symanted sold me a service they had no intention of supporting. Last I
> heard was that the Commonewealth Attorneys office was going to contact
> symantec on this matter, and I've so informed Symantec in a follow up
> conversation.
>
> Meantime, as I do like the simplicity and way it integrates well with my
> hardware firewall, I picked up a copy of NPF 2004, which, howerver strange
> sounding, was on clearance for $24.95 at Target with a $20 upgrade rebate.

Why doesn't any of that suprise me? :-)

After I ruled out malware for breaking NPF, my next cynical thought was that
Norton wasn't going to support NPF2002 -- even though I renewed my
subscription for it up until 3-18-2005! (And, as you know, when the time
came for renewal, Norton specifically asked if you wanted to renew for
NPF2002 or upgrade to 2004.)

Un/re-installing NPF and then redownloading all the Liveupdates "seemed" to
get it working again, but I'm not sure if there are going to be problems
later. Windoctor is now reporting a missing Norton .dll ("symneti.dll")
that is required by a Norton file called "SNDSvr.exe". (At least one other
person reported the same exact thing as of two days ago.)

I'm using Norton SystemWorks 2002 and NPF 2002. When I look at the
subscription date for Norton AV, it is correctly still showing 3-18-2005,
but now NPF2002 is showing one year from the current date (i.e., today,
5-14-2005).

Likewise, I have really liked Norton up until now. It has worked flawlessly
(except for a couple small hiccups, such as the "gapi32.dll" thing a while
back, which was just a path issue) over the last couple years. I really
like how it integrates together and is, for the most part, seamless and
transparent in the background. Very easy to use and configure as well.

I was planning on getting Norton 2005 products, but, if they renege on this
2004 subscription, I'm going elsewhere. I'm going to contact them as well.

$25 bucks is nothing, but the principle of it kind of pisses me off. I
would be willing to get NPF2004 (and Systemworks 2004), however, *if* my
current paid-for subscriptions will work with it. (If I remember right, out
of the box Systemworks and NPF had only a three month subscription.)

Thanks!
May 14, 2004 3:58:44 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

Thats exactly the last Liveupdate that orginally broke NPF for me: "Symantec
Redirector"!

NSW/NPF 2002, with a subscription for 3-18-2005.

Likewise, I found un/re-installing "seems" to get things working again, but
Windoctor is reporting missing .dll

I'll be contacting them too!
May 14, 2004 4:31:33 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

> $25 bucks is nothing, but the principle of it kind of pisses me off. I
> would be willing to get NPF2004 (and Systemworks 2004), however, *if* my
> current paid-for subscriptions will work with it. (If I remember right,
out
> of the box Systemworks and NPF had only a three month subscription.)

Just went back and looked. I bought both in a shrinkwrapped retail box and
they came with one year subscriptions.
(Three months is when Norton comes pre-installed on a new computer.)

So, I'd only settle with getting "NPF 2004" for it's cost MINUS what I paid
for the subscription. All right, to be fair, at least 5/6's of the
subscription cost subtracted for "NPF 2002" (since I did get two months use
out of it).

I'd also like to say that I would get "NPF 2004" if they would waiver 2005
subscription fees, but I don't think they can be trusted with honoring
something a year later.
Anonymous
May 14, 2004 5:19:02 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

It seems after much checking, and having a friend check out the download,
Norton, When it scanned for LiveUpdates, detected I was running a version no
longer supported and deleted the following file, S32LUHL1.DLL which it seems
disabled NPF. Amazingly, now that I'm running NPF2004, everything works and
the missing .DLL is now amazingly returned to the system. I've taken my
evidence to the Commonwealth Attorney's office and they find it interesting
in the least. In the meantime, I've contacted my attorney and I'm going to
pursue Symantec in small claims court, not for the money, but for the
principle. I paid for 12 months of subscription updates, and by accepting
my money and extending my subscription until December 2, 2004, Norton
entered into a contract with me. By them no longer supporting this version,
and disabling it on my system, they have violated the terms of the contract
entered into with me.

Perhaps if everyone who's had this problem takes Symantec to small claims
court for breach of contract, they'll get the point.
"JasonL" <jasolsspa@re.ms.move.n.com> wrote in message
news:10a9t36ks42fdbb@corp.supernews.com...
> > $25 bucks is nothing, but the principle of it kind of pisses me off. I
> > would be willing to get NPF2004 (and Systemworks 2004), however, *if* my
> > current paid-for subscriptions will work with it. (If I remember right,
> out
> > of the box Systemworks and NPF had only a three month subscription.)
>
> Just went back and looked. I bought both in a shrinkwrapped retail box
and
> they came with one year subscriptions.
> (Three months is when Norton comes pre-installed on a new computer.)
>
> So, I'd only settle with getting "NPF 2004" for it's cost MINUS what I
paid
> for the subscription. All right, to be fair, at least 5/6's of the
> subscription cost subtracted for "NPF 2002" (since I did get two months
use
> out of it).
>
> I'd also like to say that I would get "NPF 2004" if they would waiver 2005
> subscription fees, but I don't think they can be trusted with honoring
> something a year later.
>
>
Anonymous
May 14, 2004 5:19:03 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

"JRF" <bountyhunter@innocent.com> wrote in message
news:7c7pc.151065$f_5.62598@lakeread01...
> It seems after much checking, and having a friend check out the download,
> Norton, When it scanned for LiveUpdates, detected I was running a version
no
> longer supported and deleted the following file, S32LUHL1.DLL which it
seems
> disabled NPF. Amazingly, now that I'm running NPF2004, everything works
and
> the missing .DLL is now amazingly returned to the system. I've taken my
> evidence to the Commonwealth Attorney's office and they find it
interesting
> in the least. In the meantime, I've contacted my attorney and I'm going
to
> pursue Symantec in small claims court, not for the money, but for the
> principle. I paid for 12 months of subscription updates, and by accepting
> my money and extending my subscription until December 2, 2004, Norton
> entered into a contract with me. By them no longer supporting this
version,
> and disabling it on my system, they have violated the terms of the
contract
> entered into with me.
>
> Perhaps if everyone who's had this problem takes Symantec to small claims
> court for breach of contract, they'll get the point.
> "JasonL" <jasolsspa@re.ms.move.n.com> wrote in message
> news:10a9t36ks42fdbb@corp.supernews.com...
> > > $25 bucks is nothing, but the principle of it kind of pisses me off.
I
> > > would be willing to get NPF2004 (and Systemworks 2004), however, *if*
my
> > > current paid-for subscriptions will work with it. (If I remember
right,
> > out
> > > of the box Systemworks and NPF had only a three month subscription.)
> >
> > Just went back and looked. I bought both in a shrinkwrapped retail box
> and
> > they came with one year subscriptions.
> > (Three months is when Norton comes pre-installed on a new computer.)
> >
> > So, I'd only settle with getting "NPF 2004" for it's cost MINUS what I
> paid
> > for the subscription. All right, to be fair, at least 5/6's of the
> > subscription cost subtracted for "NPF 2002" (since I did get two months
> use
> > out of it).
> >
> > I'd also like to say that I would get "NPF 2004" if they would waiver
2005
> > subscription fees, but I don't think they can be trusted with honoring
> > something a year later.
> >
> >

Way to go! If I can help let me know!
Anonymous
May 14, 2004 11:51:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

JasonL said in news:10a7u6i2kvgiif6@corp.supernews.com:
> Also, In another article from their knowledge base, they recommended
> keeping WinXP's ICF enabled and allowing it to integrate with Norton.
> (?)
>
> So, I enabled ICF...

A firewall will slow traffic because it has to inspect each packet. Two
firewalls ... even slower. If one firewall is, say, blocking inbound
FTP requests then why bother having another firewall block the same
requests? Actually the second firewall won't because it probably never
sees the inbound FTP connection. So if the properly configured and best
firewall is the first encountered then there is no point in having the
lesser firewall looking for traffic that it will never see. If the
lesser firewall is first encountered, it would have to leak supposedly
blocked traffic to get caught by the second and better firewall. You
have a metal plate (NIS) and a screen mesh (ICF). Doesn't it matter on
which side of the steel plate you put the screen mesh? So just go with
the better firewall (NIS).

Also, although ICF is fairly simplistic in its current incarnation in
Windows XP SP-1, I hear that there will be major changes in it for SP-2.
So you might get NIS and ICF to cooperate now but later during an update
you might then find all hell breaks lose.


--
____________________________________________________________
*** Post replies to newsgroup. Share with others.
*** Email: domain = ".com" and append "=NEWS=" to Subject.
____________________________________________________________
May 14, 2004 11:56:26 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

> It seems after much checking, and having a friend check out the download,
> Norton, When it scanned for LiveUpdates, detected I was running a version
no
> longer supported and deleted the following file, S32LUHL1.DLL which it
seems
> disabled NPF. Amazingly, now that I'm running NPF2004, everything works
and
> the missing .DLL is now amazingly returned to the system. I've taken my
> evidence to the Commonwealth Attorney's office and they find it
interesting
> in the least. In the meantime, I've contacted my attorney and I'm going
to
> pursue Symantec in small claims court, not for the money, but for the
> principle. I paid for 12 months of subscription updates, and by accepting
> my money and extending my subscription until December 2, 2004, Norton
> entered into a contract with me. By them no longer supporting this
version,
> and disabling it on my system, they have violated the terms of the
contract
> entered into with me.
>
> Perhaps if everyone who's had this problem takes Symantec to small claims
> court for breach of contract, they'll get the point.

Thats interesting about that .dll ("S32LUHL1.DLL"). I just did a search and
it doesn't exist on this computer. I don't know if I had that .dll deleted
prior to NPF not working after Liveupdate requested a reboot or not. I do
know that "SYMNETI.DLL" was deleted (and remains missing).

I'm not sure what to make of the situation yet as NPF "appears" to be
working again after an un/re-install. The question now is whether there
will be future Liveupdates or not for it. (?)

This morning there was a Liveupdate for NAV, so that does appear to still be
working. The subscription "expiration date" listed in NAV appears as it
should as well. I'm concerned about NPF though because the expiration date
is no longer showing correctly.

I think I'll try to collect more information. I really don't want to mess
around with this computer now, since it "appears" to be working, but I have
an older P3 that I could use. I'll run a monitoring ultility and monitor
every from installing NPF to downloading all the Liveupdates.

I can't see Symantec just "pulling the plug". If they did, this will be a
major mistake on their part. I'd imagine this will effect many customers of
NPF who went with just renewing their subscriptions over upgrading. (We
were given the choice, after all.) I doubt this will be the only newsgroup
thread about this issue -- and one of the great things about NG's is that
everything is archived forever. I'm sure many other people deja search NG's
when deciding on purchasing various products, comparing user comments
between competing products. I find it to be an excellent resource. Is this
the type of publicity Symantec wants?

I contacted Symantec, but as of yet haven't received a reply. As soon as I
do, I'll note it here.

For now, I'll give Symantec the benefit of the doubt -- but if I get a
cookie cutter reply saying that upgrading to 2004 is needed, then I'll also
pursue further.

Thanks!
Jason
Anonymous
May 15, 2004 12:44:58 AM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

"JRF" <bountyhunter@innocent.com> wrote in
news:7c7pc.151065$f_5.62598@lakeread01:

<Snipola>
> Perhaps if everyone who's had this problem takes Symantec to small
> claims court for breach of contract, they'll get the point.
<Snipola>

Perhaps if you can find enough people with the same complaint you
can have this small claims case turned into a class action suit.
You could also bring in the government since this is would appear
to be a deliberate attempt to defraud the consumer.

Brian
--
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
Anonymous
May 15, 2004 5:11:48 AM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

To all those with problems with Symantec, this is the response I received:

To resolve the issue, which you are facing regarding the remainder of the
subscription service period for NPF 2002, I recommend that you contact
Symantec Customer Service. Symantec Customer Service will be in a better
position to provide precise information. You can contact Symantec Customer
Service at the following phone number:

(800) 441-7234

Symantec Customer Service can be reached at the above-mentioned phone number
from Monday through Friday, from 6:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Pacific Time.

It's amazing what a call from the District Attorneys office will do.

"JRF" <bountyhunter@innocent.com> wrote in message
news:7c7pc.151065$f_5.62598@lakeread01...
> It seems after much checking, and having a friend check out the download,
> Norton, When it scanned for LiveUpdates, detected I was running a version
no
> longer supported and deleted the following file, S32LUHL1.DLL which it
seems
> disabled NPF. Amazingly, now that I'm running NPF2004, everything works
and
> the missing .DLL is now amazingly returned to the system. I've taken my
> evidence to the Commonwealth Attorney's office and they find it
interesting
> in the least. In the meantime, I've contacted my attorney and I'm going
to
> pursue Symantec in small claims court, not for the money, but for the
> principle. I paid for 12 months of subscription updates, and by accepting
> my money and extending my subscription until December 2, 2004, Norton
> entered into a contract with me. By them no longer supporting this
version,
> and disabling it on my system, they have violated the terms of the
contract
> entered into with me.
>
> Perhaps if everyone who's had this problem takes Symantec to small claims
> court for breach of contract, they'll get the point.
> "JasonL" <jasolsspa@re.ms.move.n.com> wrote in message
> news:10a9t36ks42fdbb@corp.supernews.com...
> > > $25 bucks is nothing, but the principle of it kind of pisses me off.
I
> > > would be willing to get NPF2004 (and Systemworks 2004), however, *if*
my
> > > current paid-for subscriptions will work with it. (If I remember
right,
> > out
> > > of the box Systemworks and NPF had only a three month subscription.)
> >
> > Just went back and looked. I bought both in a shrinkwrapped retail box
> and
> > they came with one year subscriptions.
> > (Three months is when Norton comes pre-installed on a new computer.)
> >
> > So, I'd only settle with getting "NPF 2004" for it's cost MINUS what I
> paid
> > for the subscription. All right, to be fair, at least 5/6's of the
> > subscription cost subtracted for "NPF 2002" (since I did get two months
> use
> > out of it).
> >
> > I'd also like to say that I would get "NPF 2004" if they would waiver
2005
> > subscription fees, but I don't think they can be trusted with honoring
> > something a year later.
> >
> >
>
>
May 16, 2004 3:10:06 AM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

I'm in a similar position in that my PC is slowed right down by the
SYMPROXYSVC.EXE process after the latest update to my 2002 SW. I restored my
system to a point before the update and it seems to be OK now. Does anyone
have any comments about the effectiveness of this approach. e.g. are the
latest virus definitions still being used by NAV? Live Update doesn't show
any outstanding updates are required, presumably as the data files aren't
affected by a System Restore.

TIA.

Roger.

"JasonL" <jasolsspa@re.ms.move.n.com> wrote in message
news:10a73unqnsaia68@corp.supernews.com...
> Immedietly after doing the last Norton Liveupdate, my firewall became
> broken.
>
> The problem is with the file IAMAPP.EXE
>
> Upon startup, if Norton Firewall is set to "Load at Startup" then it
hangs.
> If Norton Firewall is set to "Load Manually", everything loads fine -- but
> when Norton Firewall is manually enabled it will only work for a couple
> minutes before it hangs. (Sometimes giving a "C++ Runtime Error" dialogue
> box for IAMAPP.EXE)
>
> Anyone know what the deal is here? This only started immedietly after the
> last Liveupdate (which consisted of a large Norton Firewall update). The
> first instance was right after Liveupdate had you reboot for changes to
take
> effect. Any fix, besides uninstalling and re-installing Norton
Firewall --
> as whats to say that it won't just do the same thing?
>
> WinXP
> Norton SystemWorks and Firewall 2002
> (Norton SW and Firewall 2002 have worked flawlessly with XP for the last
> couple years, up until now. "Upgrading" to Norton SW and Firewall 2004
> isn't an option -- as Norton didn't hesitate to take my money for a
> Liveupdate subscription for this year, using SW/Firewall 2002.)
>
>
May 16, 2004 3:10:07 AM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

> I'm in a similar position in that my PC is slowed right down by the
> SYMPROXYSVC.EXE process after the latest update to my 2002 SW. I restored
my
> system to a point before the update and it seems to be OK now. Does anyone
> have any comments about the effectiveness of this approach. e.g. are the
> latest virus definitions still being used by NAV? Live Update doesn't show
> any outstanding updates are required, presumably as the data files aren't
> affected by a System Restore.
>
> TIA.

SYMPROXYSVC.EXE becoming unstable was also one of the symptoms I had as
well.

That was being followed by IAMAPP.EXE erroring out.

As I previously noted here, I was able get things back to what "appear" as
functioning after doing an un/re-install of NPF.

NAV appears to still be functioning, including receiving Liveupdates,
however NPF is questionable.

If you could, go into Systemworks are take a look at the "expiration date"
for NPF. Is it the same as just prior to when you "rolled back", or did it
change as mine did.

Also, run Windoctor. When I run Windoctor, its now reporting to me (and
others) that a Norton file called "SYMNETI.DLL" (required by "SNDSvrc.exe")
is missing.

It would be interesting to see if you are seeing the same thing.

Thanks!
May 16, 2004 4:30:43 AM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

"JasonL" <jasolsspa@re.ms.move.n.com> wrote in message
news:10ad8i0fntqk371@corp.supernews.com...
> > I'm in a similar position in that my PC is slowed right down by the
> > SYMPROXYSVC.EXE process after the latest update to my 2002 SW. I
restored
> my
> > system to a point before the update and it seems to be OK now. Does
anyone
> > have any comments about the effectiveness of this approach. e.g. are the
> > latest virus definitions still being used by NAV? Live Update doesn't
show
> > any outstanding updates are required, presumably as the data files
aren't
> > affected by a System Restore.
> >
> > TIA.
>
> SYMPROXYSVC.EXE becoming unstable was also one of the symptoms I had as
> well.
>
> That was being followed by IAMAPP.EXE erroring out.
>
> As I previously noted here, I was able get things back to what "appear" as
> functioning after doing an un/re-install of NPF.
>
> NAV appears to still be functioning, including receiving Liveupdates,
> however NPF is questionable.
>
> If you could, go into Systemworks are take a look at the "expiration date"
> for NPF. Is it the same as just prior to when you "rolled back", or did
it
> change as mine did.
>
> Also, run Windoctor. When I run Windoctor, its now reporting to me (and
> others) that a Norton file called "SYMNETI.DLL" (required by
"SNDSvrc.exe")
> is missing.
>
> It would be interesting to see if you are seeing the same thing.
>
> Thanks!
>
>

Thanks for your reply. Yes, I also had IAMAPP.EXE failing as well although I
put that down to the CPU being hogged. The use of system restore hasn't
affected the expiration date of my subscription (1/9/04) - everything does
seem to be OK now. Unfortunately I don't have Windoctor so I can't perform
the test as you suggested.

I'm certainly annoyed that this has happened and I won't be renewing my
subscription after this. I'm hoping that Symantec bring out a patch in the
hope of stemming the bad publicity that's clearly building up.

Rog.
May 16, 2004 4:30:44 AM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls,microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

> Thanks for your reply. Yes, I also had IAMAPP.EXE failing as well although
I
> put that down to the CPU being hogged. The use of system restore hasn't
> affected the expiration date of my subscription (1/9/04) - everything does
> seem to be OK now. Unfortunately I don't have Windoctor so I can't perform
> the test as you suggested.
>
> I'm certainly annoyed that this has happened and I won't be renewing my
> subscription after this. I'm hoping that Symantec bring out a patch in the
> hope of stemming the bad publicity that's clearly building up.


I'm with you 100 percent.

At the time of our renewals, had Symantec informed us that NPF2002 would no
longer be supported this coming year and that upgrading to NPF2004 was the
only option, there would be no issue. We were given the choice of renewal,
specifically for NPF2002, though -- and accepted a renewal in favor of an
upgrade.

It seems like poor planning on Symantec's part. They should inform users
when products will no longer be supported well in advance. They should also
impliment a "cut-off date" for subscription renewals.

I contacted Symantec via email and would urge everyone else with this same
issue to do the same. I received the same "cookie-cutter" response as the
other poster in this thread: a number to contact customer support. I plan
on contacting them early next week.

For the time being, I am giving Symantec the benefit of the doubt. I
wouldn't be surprised if they addresss the issue by allowing NPF2002 users
that renewed a current subscription after such-and-such date to be able to
purchase NPF2004 at a reduced price from the "upgrade price". I'd settle
for that.

As the other posted stated, its not so much the money (what are we really
talking about here, average price at a sitdown restuarant?), but the
principle involved. First it starts with "just" $30, then it's $50, then
it's $100, and so forth.

I've liked Norton's products over the last couple of years. They have been,
for the most part, solid and stable, nicely integrated together, easy to
use, etc. I can't say that I got much use out of everything in Systemworks
(all the "resource monitoring" stuff wasn't all that great), but the HDD
defrager (Speed Disk) proved itself to be a great program. Cleansweep
worked well enough. I didn't have it constantly running, as it was somewhat
a resource hog, but would enable it prior to installing things that I knew I
would be removing later.

Planned on upgrading everything in 2005, but depending on outcome of this
may start looking at other products.
Anonymous
May 17, 2004 3:45:47 AM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

"JasonL" <jasolss@re.fsu.move.edu> wrote in message
news:10adkii3svh9tff@corp.supernews.com...
> > Thanks for your reply. Yes, I also had IAMAPP.EXE failing as well
although
> I
> > put that down to the CPU being hogged. The use of system restore hasn't
> > affected the expiration date of my subscription (1/9/04) - everything
does
> > seem to be OK now. Unfortunately I don't have Windoctor so I can't
perform
> > the test as you suggested.
> >
> > I'm certainly annoyed that this has happened and I won't be renewing my
> > subscription after this. I'm hoping that Symantec bring out a patch in
the
> > hope of stemming the bad publicity that's clearly building up.
>
>
> I'm with you 100 percent.
>
> At the time of our renewals, had Symantec informed us that NPF2002 would
no
> longer be supported this coming year and that upgrading to NPF2004 was the
> only option, there would be no issue. We were given the choice of
renewal,
> specifically for NPF2002, though -- and accepted a renewal in favor of an
> upgrade.
>
> It seems like poor planning on Symantec's part. They should inform users
> when products will no longer be supported well in advance. They should
also
> impliment a "cut-off date" for subscription renewals.
>
> I contacted Symantec via email and would urge everyone else with this same
> issue to do the same. I received the same "cookie-cutter" response as the
> other poster in this thread: a number to contact customer support. I plan
> on contacting them early next week.
>
> For the time being, I am giving Symantec the benefit of the doubt. I
> wouldn't be surprised if they addresss the issue by allowing NPF2002 users
> that renewed a current subscription after such-and-such date to be able to
> purchase NPF2004 at a reduced price from the "upgrade price". I'd settle
> for that.

They do for Internet Security which includes NPF, $39.95. I upgraded to
2004 from 2002 with a 12 month subscription. I chose the internet download
delivery, sent my check 29 April, they debited my account on the 10th, on
the 14th I sent them a web-mail, and on the 16th I was able to download it.
To my surprise, it did install on top of 02 without too much hassle so far.

About the 12th I did the usual liveupdate, and experienced awful slowdown
booting, the last stages when system tray loads. Did a System Restore and
got more liveupdates, and it worked normal, WinMe anyway. But it didn't
download the same updates.
May 17, 2004 7:56:09 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

> They do for Internet Security which includes NPF, $39.95. I upgraded to
> 2004 from 2002 with a 12 month subscription. I chose the internet
download
> delivery, sent my check 29 April, they debited my account on the 10th, on
> the 14th I sent them a web-mail, and on the 16th I was able to download
it.
> To my surprise, it did install on top of 02 without too much hassle so
far.

I'm sorry, but did you read any of this thread?

Yes, I'm aware of the "upgrade prices" for 2004 products, including NPF2004
which is $29.95

The main issue being discussed here is that we have purchased subscription
renewals for previous verisons of NPF (for 2004 to 2005) and Symantec
recently elected to not honor them.

I'm not going to give Symatec $30 for NPF2004. I will give them $15 ($30
minus subscription just purchased), but not a penny more.

Otherwise, I'm going elsewhere.
Anonymous
May 18, 2004 1:14:03 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

That's a good synopsis of things that need to be fixed (and probably won't
be).
Anonymous
May 19, 2004 4:32:31 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

Hello all,

Excuse me for jumping in, but I uninstalled NPF 2002 a year ago because
it slowed down my computer to a crawl.

I still have Norton Systemworks 2002 on my computer, however. Today, I
received an error message telling me that my symneti.dll file is
missing. I serarched Symantec's support site and found noting about
this, or how to fix it.

Can you folks make any suggestions?

Thanks,
Edie

FYI, I am using a PII computer with Win98.



--
Edie
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted via http://www.webservertalk.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
View this thread: http://www.webservertalk.com/message224357.html
Anonymous
May 19, 2004 9:31:20 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

Edie wrote:


> I still have Norton Systemworks 2002 on my computer, however. Today, I
> received an error message telling me that my symneti.dll file is
> missing. I serarched Symantec's support site and found noting about
> this, or how to fix it.


http://www.webservertalk.com/message224357-2.html


Your product support has ended. Rumor has it Symantec
deletes this file to disable your product. I tend to
doubt this. Never know.

I had a similar problem in the past with Symantec files
vanishing from System Works 2000. I remember having a
really hard time fixing this. In a nutshell,

uninstall your Norton product, all features

do not reboot

regedit.exe -> search

search your Windows registry for Symantec, delete all keys
search your Windows registry for Norton, delete all keys
search your Windows registry for Live Update, delete all keys

msconfig.exe -> start up menu

disable any references to Symantec, Norton and Live Update

open your autoexec.bat and check for entries there, delete if found

reboot

reinstall Norton from disk

reboot

Should be ok


Be very careful editing your registry. A single mistake
can cause major problems. Make a backup copy of your
current registry. Learn how to reinstall it from DOS
or from Windows Safe Mode boot, before editing.

System Mechanic has a nice feature for this making it easy.

Brass tacks is you need to completely clean your system
of all references to Norton before reinstallation.


Purl Gurl
Anonymous
May 19, 2004 10:00:44 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

Purl Gurl wrote:

> Edie wrote:

(snipped a lot)

> > I still have Norton Systemworks 2002 on my computer, however. Today, I
> > received an error message telling me that my symneti.dll file is
> > missing. I serarched Symantec's support site and found noting about
> > this, or how to fix it.

> uninstall your Norton product, all features

(steps snipped)

Forgot, check your win.ini and system.ini files
for references to Norton. Remove them.


Purl Gurl
Anonymous
May 23, 2004 12:15:56 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

It appears that Symantec may now have fixed this problem. See
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,10312609~mode=fl... , which apparently
came out late on Friday evening.

Have any of the NIS/NPF 2002 users that experienced the problem after the 12
May LiveUpdate applied this patch; does it solve the problem?

Next question: Does this fix, primarily for NIS/NPF 2002 users, still
provide a solution to the eEYE vulnerabilities that started all this?
(Anyone checked using eEYE's Retina scanner?)

And finally, by way of feedback, just what files are changed by this update?
Anonymous
May 23, 2004 12:15:57 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

I'm using Norton Personal Firewall 2003 and am having many of the same
problems 2002 users are experiencing. It was may understanding, after
speaking to tech support, that a new patch was put out last Friday. I've
uninstalled and ran LiveUpdate after last Friday but am still getting the
same errors. (See my other posts in this thread.) Hope it works better for
2002 users than it did for me. Perhaps I'm not getting the same patched
update or perhaps no patched update at all since I'm using 2003 and most
users with problems are using 2002.


"Joseph V. Morris" <jvmorris@erols.com> wrote in message
news:40b0967a$0$3107$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> It appears that Symantec may now have fixed this problem. See
> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,10312609~mode=fl... , which
apparently
> came out late on Friday evening.
>
> Have any of the NIS/NPF 2002 users that experienced the problem after the
12
> May LiveUpdate applied this patch; does it solve the problem?
>
> Next question: Does this fix, primarily for NIS/NPF 2002 users, still
> provide a solution to the eEYE vulnerabilities that started all this?
> (Anyone checked using eEYE's Retina scanner?)
>
> And finally, by way of feedback, just what files are changed by this
update?
>
>
>
Anonymous
May 23, 2004 2:33:55 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

I went back up to take a look at what I think was your original post in this
thread on that problem dated 14 May. I THINK what you're describing is more
likely related to a DIFFERENT problem associated with a Redirector upate
around 29 April, IIRC. There WERE some people who had problems with that
LU (and using NIS/NPF 2003, I might add), but I don't at the moment where I
saw that discussed. . . .

"LAH" <wildcatsareus@kansas.nonet> wrote in message
news:p V0sc.481$ri.46555@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
> . . . . It was may understanding, after
> speaking to tech support, that a new patch was put out last Friday.

The patch that I just referred to was apparently put out late on Saturday
(22 May or 23 May, depending on where your clock is set), which is unusual
in and of itself. I think the one you are referring to was dated 15 May?

The problem with these Redirector updates is that they can actually involve
one or more of a dozen different executables and it's very difficult to find
out which files are actually being changed. (And it would be NICE if they
were a bit more forthcoming about that, inasmuch as half the effort in this
latest fiasco went into simply trying to locate which NIS/NPF 2002 file was
screwed up.)

>I've uninstalled and ran LiveUpdate after last Friday but am still getting
the
> same errors. (See my other posts in this thread.) Hope it works better
for
> 2002 users than it did for me.

Still waiting for a definitive conclusion from someone running NIS/NPF 2002
as to whether this LiveUpdate really solves anything. Seems to me that the
BBR/DSLR thread referenced includes one report of no problems on NIS/NPF
2004.

> Perhaps I'm not getting the same patched
> update or perhaps no patched update at all since I'm using 2003 and most
> users with problems are using 2002.

It's quite likely that the patches SHOULD be different between 2002, on the
one hand, and 2003/2004, on the other. Symantec made a rather dramatic
change in the executable architecture at that point (so the CODE at least
should be considerably different). Also, there's a little matter of which
OS is in use. I think Win 9x/ME users still get *.vxd files while Win
NT/2K/XP users now get *.sys files.

Sorry, I can't help more. I've never even seen NIS/NPF 2003 or 2004.
Anonymous
June 1, 2004 2:20:01 AM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

I too am joining the long list of Symantec customers that got hosed by
the LiveUpdate. I have Norton Internet Security 2002. After the
update on 5-13-04 I immediately began having problems. My whole
computer was very slow, I started seeing numerous pop-up messages about
Internet Access Control, numerous Alert Tracker messages, and numerous
event logs. Then my computer suddenly rebooted! And I have windows XP
Pro, which never rebooted before. It rebooted itself again later many
times.

I suspected the redirector, because that was the unusual thing in the
LiveUpdate. I spent many many hours troubleshooting. Curses on
Symantec for not having a bit of advice on its web site, or even just
acknowledging the problem. And no support whatever, even though they
accepted my subscription money less than 1 year ago.

I restored my computer to a general backup that I had done 2 months
ago, using Automated System Recovery that comes with windows. ASR
works great, I recommend it. Now my machine works again with the old
pre-update files. I can liveUpdate the virus defs ok, but I simply
uncheck the redirector so I don't get that again. That redirector is
as good as a virus.

I did't know about this site till today. A good site. If I had looked
here several days ago I would have saved time.
--
marshall
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted via http://www.webservertalk.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
View this thread: http://www.webservertalk.com/message224357.html
June 2, 2004 8:49:08 PM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

A couple of years ago I tried to do a similar thing and got into terrible
trouble. The problem with Symantec is that it is so interwoven with the
operating system that if there is a problem loading the Symantec software,
there is a good chance that Windows XP will refuse to load either. This
happened to me and it took a week of questions on this and other newsgroups
through a friends internet connection before I could get it sorted out. My
whole computer was unusable during that time.

George
"Purl Gurl" <purlgurl@purlgurl.net> wrote in message
news:40ABFC58.14FE9B4A@purlgurl.net...
> Edie wrote:
>
>
> > I still have Norton Systemworks 2002 on my computer, however. Today, I
> > received an error message telling me that my symneti.dll file is
> > missing. I serarched Symantec's support site and found noting about
> > this, or how to fix it.
>
>
> http://www.webservertalk.com/message224357-2.html
>
>
> Your product support has ended. Rumor has it Symantec
> deletes this file to disable your product. I tend to
> doubt this. Never know.
>
> I had a similar problem in the past with Symantec files
> vanishing from System Works 2000. I remember having a
> really hard time fixing this. In a nutshell,
>
> uninstall your Norton product, all features
>
> do not reboot
>
> regedit.exe -> search
>
> search your Windows registry for Symantec, delete all keys
> search your Windows registry for Norton, delete all keys
> search your Windows registry for Live Update, delete all keys
>
> msconfig.exe -> start up menu
>
> disable any references to Symantec, Norton and Live Update
>
> open your autoexec.bat and check for entries there, delete if found
>
> reboot
>
> reinstall Norton from disk
>
> reboot
>
> Should be ok
>
>
> Be very careful editing your registry. A single mistake
> can cause major problems. Make a backup copy of your
> current registry. Learn how to reinstall it from DOS
> or from Windows Safe Mode boot, before editing.
>
> System Mechanic has a nice feature for this making it easy.
>
> Brass tacks is you need to completely clean your system
> of all references to Norton before reinstallation.
>
>
> Purl Gurl
Anonymous
June 3, 2004 12:49:21 AM

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

Try the thread that sonofjay references in his post in this thread. There's
a solution there.

"marshall" <marshall.1757u0@mail.webservertalk.com> wrote in message
news:15912be2af5d437fbe6d57c98d6b41e9@news.thenewsgroups.com...
.. . . .
!