Woody Leonhard's no-bull news, tips and help for Windows, Office and more… Please disable your ad blocker – our (polite!) ads help keep AskWoody going!
Home icon Home icon Home icon Email icon RSS icon
  • Norton Safe Web giving a spurious warning about AskWoody

    Posted on July 5th, 2018 at 14:33 woody Comment on the AskWoody Lounge

    Many years ago, I had the same problem.

    Norton Safe Web is saying that there is an

    Identity Threat / Phishing Attack in location/on page
    https://askwoody.com/2018/hotmail-outlook-pop-server-switcheroo

    which is preposterous. A quick glance at the page shows a handful of links to Microsoft sites.

    Norton’s warning is a classic false positive, generated by an aberrant algorithm.

    I’m going through the steps to get this site evaluated by Norton, bless their pointed little heads. In the interim, if you’re using Norton Safe Web, ignore it. Better, get rid of Norton entirely.

    UPDATE: The re-evaluation instructions say it’ll take two weeks. Oh boy.

    If that helped, take a second to support AskWoody on Patreon

    Home Forums Norton Safe Web giving a spurious warning about AskWoody

    This topic contains 52 replies, has 24 voices, and was last updated by  OscarCP 1 week, 6 days ago.

    • Author
      Posts
    • #201616 Reply

      woody
      Da Boss

      Many years ago, I had the same problem. Norton Safe Web is saying that there is an Identity Threat / Phishing Attack in location/on page https://askwo
      [See the full post at: Norton Safe Web giving a spurious warning about AskWoody]

      6 users thanked author for this post.
    • #201622 Reply

      jescott418
      AskWoody Lounger

      Yep sometimes this security stuff is more the problem then the solution.

      4 users thanked author for this post.
    • #201624 Reply

      Seff
      AskWoody Lounger

      On the one hand I’m surprised people are still using Norton, on the other hand my son has used it for years and has never had any problems. I used it among other paid for AV programs a long time ago and like all such programs at the time found it bloatware and prone to false positives.

      Thanks for the information Woody.

      1 user thanked author for this post.
      • #201948 Reply

        willygirl
        AskWoody Lounger

        Like your son, I’ve had it for years and until now haven’t had any issues with Norton. But I suspected this was something out of the blue in the way of fake and continued on to Woody’s site.

        1 user thanked author for this post.
    • #201627 Reply

      anonymous
    • #201629 Reply

      Demeter
      AskWoody Lounger

      I have used Norton for almost a decade and have never had any real problems. Was almost 100% sure “askwoody” was OK. Thanks Woody.

      3 users thanked author for this post.
    • #201635 Reply

      anonymous

      I use Norton because I get it free from Comcast and have never had a problem with it.

      I always pay attention to what Woody says, but if I don t use Norton what Anti  virus should I use with Windows 7?

      I really don t want to use anything Microsoft unless I have to.  The only thing I use Microsoft for is Windows 7 .

      • #201647 Reply

        Seff
        AskWoody Lounger

        I use Microsoft Security Essentials, for two reasons.

        First, it’s effective and never produces false positives or interferes with anything else.

        Second, to address your particular concern, because it’s from Microsoft and therefore likely to be highly compatible with Windows and other MS products.

        I also use MBAM free version 2.x for manual malware scans.

        • This reply was modified 2 weeks, 2 days ago by  Seff.
        3 users thanked author for this post.
        • #201651 Reply

          Microfix
          AskWoody MVP

          @seff  a third reason could possibly be that it’s not bloated for W7

          | 2x Group A- W8.1 | Group A+ Linux Hybrid | Group W W7 Pro | Group W XP Pro
            No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created IT - AE
          • #201662 Reply

            Seff
            AskWoody Lounger

            Agreed. I should have made that clearer in my “doesn’t interfere with anything else” comment.

      • #201653 Reply

        Geo
        AskWoody Lounger

        If you have W7 , I`ve been using Microsoft Security Essentials for free for years, plus the free ADWCleaner.  No problems.

        2 users thanked author for this post.
      • #202046 Reply

        anonymous

        I have been using ‘Barkly’ and absolutely LOVE it. (I’ve been using it for about 6 months now).

        It’s still learning my environments so I do get some false positives, but it’s very easy to teach it when there are false positives.

        The Barkly software is basically a smart scanner that sits between the subsystem and OS.

        It’s hard to explain the way it works simply, so here’s a little snippet from their website:

        The protection dynamically combines machine-learning-powered attribute models and behavior indicators to identify and block malicious techniques and intent in real-time. Barkly’s Rapidvisor has the deepest visibility of any endpoint agent, monitoring processes across user space, the OS, and the CPU to see and block more attacks.

        1 user thanked author for this post.
    • #201652 Reply

      geekdom
      AskWoody Lounger

      Two weeks is three months in dog years or forever in computer years.

      Group G{ot backup} Win7|64-bit|SP1

      1 user thanked author for this post.
    • #201654 Reply

      Microfix
      AskWoody MVP

      @woody ‘UPDATE: The re-evaluation instructions say it’ll take two weeks. Oh boy.’

      Heads-up Note: in two weeks the site certificate would have expired (14th July 2018)

      | 2x Group A- W8.1 | Group A+ Linux Hybrid | Group W W7 Pro | Group W XP Pro
        No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created IT - AE
      5 users thanked author for this post.
    • #201657 Reply

      anonymous

      woody wrote:

      Norton Safe Web is saying that there is an

      Identity Threat / Phishing Attack in location/on page
      https://askwoody.com/2018/hotmail-outlook-pop-server-switcheroo

      which is preposterous. A quick glance at the page shows a handful of links to Microsoft sites.

      Norton’s warning is a classic false positive, generated by an aberrant algorithm.

      As the Askwoody page being reported is obviously clean, it’s possible the triggering event that generated the warning was a bad ad that made it through the ad network. But even if true, seems like this one is still on Norton, for a couple of reasons:

      1) if a bad ad is served–in good faith by an established site through a legitimate ad network–sure, blackhole the bad ad & associated domains/ip addresses/redirects/downloads/etc, but maybe NOT the established site acting in good faith.

      2) if you do s***w up and throw a false positive on a pretty-obviously-NOT-malicious site, maybe don’t take _two weeks_ to correct the false positive! Fwiw, took me ~30 seconds on virustotal(.com) to double-check Askwoody.com (good news, woody, virustotal shows _NO_ scan engines (0/68) having any problems with your site–all show GREEN & CLEAN)!

      4 users thanked author for this post.
    • #201665 Reply

      anonymous

      Once had such a thing going on with Kaspersky, was solved within an hour. Probably Norton has an intimate relationship with Microsoft…? Old boys network, last of the Mohikans, crewmates of the Titanic etc. 😀

      1 user thanked author for this post.
    • #201671 Reply

      lmacri
      AskWoody Lounger

      Hi Woody:

      Just a warning that the automated review process for site re-evaluations for Norton Safe Web stopped working 2 years ago and AFAIK it still isn’t working.  See floplot’s 07-Jul-2016 post in the thread Rise in Requests for Norton Safe Web Site Rating Appeals.

      Site owners requiring a re-evaluation are currently posting requests in the Norton Toolbar / Norton Identity Safe board at https://community.norton.com/en/forums/norton-toolbar-norton-identity-safe and floplot and Symantec employee Console_Ops (a member of the Norton Safe Web team) are monitoring that board for requests from site owners to have their site re-evaluated.
      ————
      32-bit Vista Home Premium SP2 * FF ESR v52.9.0 * Norton Security v22.14.2.13

      3 users thanked author for this post.
    • #201677 Reply

      Peacelady
      AskWoody Lounger

      I’m getting fed up with Norton. I have a paid version that I took off Automatic Renewal. Now I keep getting notices to my home that I better sign up for Automatic Renewal blah blah blah. I find these weekly reminders very annoying. What is your opinion of just having Malwarebytes? (I know some people here think Norton and Malwarebytes don’t play well together but it’s been years and I have no problems.) Anyone feel safe just using Malwarebytes? Thanks!

    • #201681 Reply

      OscarCP
      AskWoody Lounger

      Maybe not exactly on topic, but close: I had Norton Antivirus for several years, and finally got rid of it because of the following:

      (1) Too slow. Took more than half an hour to scan my PC every time, even when I had used it to scan the day before. So, being a lazy busy person, I would scan maybe once a week. I replaced it with Webroot, that takes some 5 minutes, so now I scan the PC twice daily every day. Judging from Woody’s cover story, maybe “slow” is a Norton defining attribute?

      (2) Conflicts with other commonly used software, some of which I had on the PC, and many people complaining about it online.

      (3) For a while, people were also complaining that not only they were having all these conflicts as in (2) but that when they tried to quit using Norton they could not stop being charged through Automatic Renewal, even when they had already asked, repeatedly, for that to stop.

      By the time I decided to use it no longer, Norton was providing a simple way to discontinue those renewals through the user’s account. Maybe some of the other problems have been resolved as well. But once burned, twice shy, as they say.

      As to an email filter algorithm glitch being the reason for Woody’s “blacklisting”: that is not an common experience, unfortunately. For years it was touch and go if my ISP’s algorithm was going to allow the delivery of the emails from some friends and colleagues in Japan. Same with emails from people I know and have been collaborating with for years at a university in Barcelona, Spain, that have recently started to be classified as “phishing”. And now and then, at randoms intervals, some of their emails get blocked and I receive this notice from the ISP that this has happened since the senders have been blacklisted because of whatever.

      Eventually, having also a second account with Gmail and a third one at NASA, sharing those with the afflicted parties has provided a solution of sorts to such problems. A solution, I’m afraid, that is not available to Woody’s.

       

      • #201787 Reply

        anonymous

        With respect, a few thoughts:

        – Scan speed is not the same as scan effectiveness. And of the two, we can probably agree that scan effectiveness is more important.

        – For a long time now, many many years, norton security scan engines have had the option of performing two types of scans: a “Quick Scan”, which is, well, quick (checks current key “commonly infected areas and startup files”, and probably takes 5 min or so to run) – and a “Full System Scan” (that’s the long one that examines the entire system/device).

        – For a long time now, many many years, yes – Norton has provided a way to discontinue automatic renewals through a user’s online account.

        – Yes, certainly, there was a time when Norton’s offerings developed a bad reputation for bloat and poor performance, but that time was 10+ years ago. My experience with Norton over the past decade has been quite similar to Demeter, who mentioned above that he has “used Norton for almost a decade and have never had any real problems.”

        – Yes, woody has good reason to be upset with the Norton Safe Web folks (as noted above in anon post 201657), but we should probably try to remember that Norton’s Safe Web operation is only part of what they do, and many people have been using their software/security products successfully – and rather uneventfully – for many years.

        (Ok, Norton haters, I’ve said my piece – now do your duty & chop me into pieces… 😉 )

        1 user thanked author for this post.
        • #201802 Reply

          Peacelady
          AskWoody Lounger

          – For a long time now, many many years, yes – Norton has provided a way to discontinue automatic renewals through a user’s online account

          Last year I found it a little awkward to manage to turn off automatic renewals — but I accomplished it. Now every week I get a threatening letter to my home saying: “Important: You are receiving this notice because your Norton subscription will no longer be automatically renewed each year. This puts you at risk of losing your Norton Security protection. Please turn on the auto renewal feature for your Norton subscription now.”

          On the outside of the letter it says: URGENT ACTION REQUESTED ON YOUR ACCOUNT.

          I wouldn’t mind receiving this once but I’m getting the letter every week to my home. My expiration date is February 2018 so I expect many more letters. I think this is just wrong. They have a phone number to call but it looks like it’s to turn on the auto renewal so I don’t dare call it to tell them to stop sending letters.

          2 users thanked author for this post.
          • #201842 Reply

            anonymous

            Peacelady wrote:

            Now every week I get a threatening letter to my home saying…

            I wouldn’t mind receiving this once but I’m getting the letter every week…

            Wow, seriously?

            I could see Norton sending periodic email messages, and maybe even an occasional alert via snail mail (companies want to keep a paying customer – think magazine subscription renewal requests), but A LETTER EVERY WEEK??? WOW! That’s crazy!

            If I was getting a letter every week from Norton (or any other company) regarding a subscription renewal, I know I’d be, er, quite peeved (unfortunately, lounge rules prevent me from sharing my initial unedited thoughts on the matter). And, yes, if you’re receiving a letter from Norton every week, then you certainly have good reason to be upset with them.

            They have a phone number to call but it looks like it’s to turn on the auto renewal so I don’t dare call it to tell them to stop sending letters.

            Sorry I can’t do more, but here maybe I can help. It’s very likely that the phone number on the letter you received is just a general phone number for Norton Support (e.g., maybe 855-815-2726 ?), so you should be able to call it to report your problem and express your displeasure, without worrying that your call will automatically reactivate auto renewal. As long as you clearly express to those you speak with that you want auto renewal to stay OFF, then it should stay off.

            Hope this helps, if only a little bit.

            1 user thanked author for this post.
            • #201937 Reply

              Peacelady
              AskWoody Lounger

              Support (e.g., maybe 855-815-2726 ?), so you should be able to call it to report your problem and express your displeasure, without worrying that your call will automatically reactivate auto renewal.

              Yes – that’s the number on the letter.  Thanks for this info – I will call and tell them to take me off their reminder letter list.

        • #202126 Reply

          RDRguy
          AskWoody Lounger

          I think in today’s world to stay competitive with the other guys & maintain sales, you can’t be slow at scanning using lots of system resources to stay protected while the other guys give you essentially the same protection with quicker file/item risk evaluation using less resources. If this were still the case, I think Symantec and/or Norton would have been out of business a long time ago. After all, it wasn’t/isn’t free like Windows 10.

          Like you, I also believe in and like Symantec but I use a Symantec all-in-one enterprise product on all my home PC systems.

          Though I’ve used several Norton products over the years, about 12-13 years ago I switched over to their “enterprise” level security products. At 1st I used “Symantec Client Security” (SCS). When it went EOL, I transitioned to its replacement “Symantec Endpoint Security” (SEP), current 12 version 12.1.6 MP10 which has a local install definitions database.

          My personal experience with SCS & SEP began at work as many big corporations as well as the US Government DOD use it. (I know, DOD got hacked but that also happens to businesses and/or other Gov entities that don’t use Symantec/Norton products too)

          I think you get better Symantec support with their enterprise products, they provide many more features than their consumer versions and to be honest, their cost isn’t really that much more than the Norton consumer products.

          A couple of years ago they came out with a Cloud based version currently at 14.2 in which mainly the definitions can either be installed locally or for a smaller footprint can remain on the cloud. This may be a good idea if your always connected or not but, I personally like to have the defs available off-line for times when I’m transferring files to/from/between off-line systems.

          If anyone’s curious, my previous posts about SEP are here & here.

          Win7 Group B (Ultimate & Pro) [x64 & x86]
          MSOffice Pro Plus 2010 SP2 (x86 Perpetual)
          MSOffice Pro Plus 2013 SP1 (x64 Perpetual)
          RDRguy

          1 user thanked author for this post.
        • #202226 Reply

          OscarCP
          AskWoody Lounger

          Anonymous  #201842 : “Ok, Norton haters, I’ve said my piece – now do your duty & chop me into pieces…”

          Nah! We’ll just ignore you (smiley face).

          Fortunately, I now use a different anti malware product that scans in a few (5 – 7) minutes the whole 750 GB hard disk, of which some 350 GB are already occupied by files of the OS, mine and who knows whose. Which I do twice a day: once when I am done looking at, or for things on the Web and  ready to start doing some work; and twice around just before calling it a day. This product speed is the result of the search for malicious bugs not being done on my machine but on a server in the Cloud. Thus is not as terribly unsafe as it may sound, because no actual files, but file hashes are sent for examination at the anti malware makers’ server. It also means that the search is always against the latest malware information in that company’s servers, so the only thing that gets updated in my machine is the occasional patch or upgrade of the malware utility application. So far I have been happily problem-free on the malware infestation front (that I know). Or, at lest, my bank and credit card accounts have not been looted yet and no outstanding warrants for my arrest for crimes I was not aware of having committed have been issued.

          But I am giving serious thought to getting another malware application to do a separate scan with it maybe once a week, just in case.

    • #201682 Reply

      RDRguy
      AskWoody Lounger

      @woody & MVPs

      Confirmed, Askwoody.com isn’t working if you’re using Norton ConnectSafe as your DNS server. However, I don’t think they’re blocking it as being a bad site or linking to a bad site.

      I think they’ve either lost or corrupted your site’s security certificate or your site’s certificate turned to toast on your end. Firefox (v61.0.1) w/ router setup using Norton ConnectSafe DNS addresses 199.85.126.30 / 199.85.127.30 results in pic shown below:

      Askwoody-Certificate-Fail

      If they were blocking it, it should look something like this: (and no, I’m not visiting a porn site)

      Norton-ConnectSafe-Block

      Trying all of Norton ConnectSafe DNS addresses results in the same “Your connection is not secure” indication. Using OpenDNS server addresses 208.67.222.222 / 208.67.220.220 – things return to normal.

      For others referencing Norton AntiVirus or Anti-Malware products, Norton ConnectSafe is neither an AntiVirus nor Anti-Malware program or anything else like it.

      Notron ConnectSafe here is their free DNS server like OpenDNS here and others that help block your web activity from being sent to known bad websites hosting Malware, Porn, Drugs, etc. Though I’m no expert, if you’re trying to get to the “Dark Web” you probably don’t want to use any of these.

      For those that may be interested, more info about NortonConnectSafe & router config here, Windows PC config here & Mac PC config here. If you have young children, this option might be something to consider.

      I myself have been using the router config DNS addresses 199.85.126.30 / 199.85.127.30 / 208.85.222.222 for several years and until now, have never had any issues though maybe now & then I do get the “blocked due to malware hosting” pop-up by clicking on something I probably shouldn’t have.

      Win7 Group B (Ultimate & Pro) [x64 & x86]
      MSOffice Pro Plus 2010 SP2 (x86 Perpetual)
      MSOffice Pro Plus 2013 SP1 (x64 Perpetual)
      RDRguy

      Attachments:
      You must be logged in to view attached files.
      4 users thanked author for this post.
    • #201710 Reply

      Sparky
      AskWoody Lounger

      They should stick with building motorcycles, Oh that’s a different Norton, me bad 🙂

      HP W7 Home Premium, SP1, 64-bit, AMD Phenom II, Group A

    • #201712 Reply

      anonymous

      It looks like Norton has used a very blunt instrument to pick out a lot of the “pop server” comments and partial server urls and as a result thought “uh-oh phishing”. It isn’t a particularly good service if it is fooled so easily and even worse if you have to jump through hoops to get the damage undone.

    • #201722 Reply

      RDRguy
      AskWoody Lounger

      If your spouse is spending way too much time on Askwoody.com and not getting enough done around the house nor spending enough quality time with you …

      FREE … and for a “limited time only” … Norton ConnectSafe DNS

      Norton ConnectSafe DNS server will block that “pesky” Askwoody.com website and prevent those sleepless “up at all hours” nights listening to your spouse’s “click-ity clack” worn-out keyboard 🙂

      Win7 Group B (Ultimate & Pro) [x64 & x86]
      MSOffice Pro Plus 2010 SP2 (x86 Perpetual)
      MSOffice Pro Plus 2013 SP1 (x64 Perpetual)
      RDRguy

      2 users thanked author for this post.
    • #201754 Reply

      jabeattyauditor
      AskWoody Lounger

      Not that anyone should like Norton Safe Web, but one could make the point that links to anything on microsoft.com really are phishing links…

      … especially links to the Windows Update Catalog.

      🙂

    • #201775 Reply

      Canadian Tech
      AskWoody MVP

      I was a died in the wool advocate for Norton Antivirus for years and years. All of my clients had to use it. Then Symantec decided to discontinue their AV product in favour a vastly more expensive “security” product. One that includes many components that do nothing good for a system and provide numerous problems. I put up with its frequent failures and learned how to cope with them.

      Then I wend investigating and found BitDefender Antivirus. My now 130 clients have been using BD now for nearly 4 years. There has not been a single problem infection or malware on a one of these systems in all that time, the software is vastly less resource needy, quite un-intrusive and completely effective. To cap all that quite reasonably priced.

      CT

      5 users thanked author for this post.
      • #201778 Reply

        Microfix
        AskWoody MVP

        +1 for BitDefender (even the free version which I’ve been using on W8.1, I’ll eventually buy it but as of now, the free version suits my needs without being intrusive)

        | 2x Group A- W8.1 | Group A+ Linux Hybrid | Group W W7 Pro | Group W XP Pro
          No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created IT - AE
        • This reply was modified 2 weeks, 1 day ago by  Microfix. Reason: wrong OS
        2 users thanked author for this post.
        • #201782 Reply

          Canadian Tech
          AskWoody MVP

          I strongly encourage use of the AntiVirus product, not the Security product. It can be had for a very reasonable price: https://www.bitdefender.com/solutions/antivirus.html

          CT

          6 users thanked author for this post.
          • #201824 Reply

            Peacelady
            AskWoody Lounger

            Thanks everyone for your BitDefender recommendations.  I am going to delete Norton and get the BitDefender Antivirus.   The separate browser for online banking sounds like it  is a real plus for me – I’ve been using Firefox, do you think the BitDefender one is safer?  Thanks again — I am so glad I found Woody’s — so much valuable information shared by you wonderful people.

            1 user thanked author for this post.
      • #201806 Reply

        anonymous

        Canadian Tech wrote:

        I was a died in the wool advocate for Norton Antivirus for years and years. All of my clients had to use it. Then Symantec decided to discontinue their AV product

        Apparently enough people were unhappy with that decision for Norton to rethink and reverse it. Fyi from Norton website:

        Norton AntiVirus Basic (just AV, no Firewall)
        $29.99 for 1 PC (first year price, $20 discount)
        https://us.norton.com/norton-antivirus

        2 users thanked author for this post.
        • #201811 Reply

          Canadian Tech
          AskWoody MVP

          I appreciate that heads up. I was not aware of this. Obviously, they are seeing the mistake that I so avidly went on about back then. Shame. I would still be using their product had they not done that stupid move. However, since I found a substitute, I discovered a vastly better product.

          CT

          1 user thanked author for this post.
    • #201779 Reply

      anonymous

      I was a Norton user for many years until I decided not to update to their very next version; it was exceedingly buggy.  For a time, Symantec remediated Norton AV’s known security exposures in the version I was using and in the buggy version.  Then they made a policy decision to stop fixing security exposures in anything other than their latest bug-ridden version,  exposing all who shunned the update to exploits.  I wrote-off the remainder of my paid subscription and moved to MSE. I never looked back once.

    • #201829 Reply

      Cybertooth
      AskWoody Lounger

      Norton products used to have a beautiful (IMO) interface, using a black and gold theme. Very snazzy.

      Over the last several years they have transitioned to a blinding, all-white interface that I can hardly stand to look at, I have to turn down the screen brightness and then turn it back up when I’m done working on Norton. I have actually considered switching to a different AV product because of this, but have kept it on because of the anti-spam filter for Outlook and the network monitor.

      More recently, they eliminated the network monitor (probably to drive sales of the home router product that they introduced shortly afterward), so I have one less reason to stay with Norton.

       

    • #201864 Reply

      Anonymous

      Folks, being a support person donating my time on the Norton support forums, I find it absurd to just tell the community “to just not use Norton”. I do however respect all opinions. Having used Norton products since the early days and providing product support on the Norton USA site I can attest without reservation not all issues with Norton are the result of a faulty product. The end user plays a role as well, most times, we find only after the fact there are things the end user wishes to remain hidden. Cracked software, product and/or system configurations that are so weird they will make your head spin. An occasional false positive is to be had with most A/V solutions out there so for me it doesn’t break the bank. I personally had rather have a occasional false positive than the opposite. Cheers!!

    • #201865 Reply

      Joulia.S
      AskWoody Lounger

      Well Woody,your annoyance is understandable and fully justified,

      however as you probably wish for Norton to get this site evaluated as soon as possible,

      may get them to not be as helpful as they would otherwise be,if your suggestion to all to ‘ get

      rid of Norton entirely ‘ catches their attention..:) No ?

      Windows 7,Home Premium 64 bit - Lenovo laptop
      Group A - Intel (R)Core i7 Processors -

    • #201879 Reply

      Anonymous

      All: I have posted to the Norton forums for Norton to have a look at this ASAP. Safe Web/Bluecoat on Core has been an issue for some time now that REALLY needs professional attention. I have also sent info to my contact who deals with Safe Web directly to get a swift resolution.

      Cheers

      6 users thanked author for this post.
      • #201913 Reply

        satrow
        AskWoody MVP

        Tell them heuristics = guesswork, 15 characters of descriptive text does not make a virus/phishing attempt/whatever. Any FPs are costly and very bad news for everyone involved, suggest they use humans for testing busier sites with hitherto clean reputations before allowing those heuristic ‘detections’ to make it to the next blocklist update.

        They’ve been guilty of doing this for well over a decade to my knowledge, time to stop resting on whatever rotting laurels remain and come clean do the job properly.

      • #201925 Reply

        woody
        Da Boss

        Thank you!

    • #202009 Reply

      rontpxz81
      AskWoody Lounger

      I like Norton and am not going to get into debate about security software.

      However, this Norton Safeweb warning is making it difficult to navigate this site- pops up for every topic selected, even sign in.

      I followed link in warning and posted user review as no problems with website, does little good.

      Up to Woody to resolve this problem with Symantec!

    • #202021 Reply

      Cybertooth
      AskWoody Lounger

      What gets me is that Norton is declaring askwoody.com to be a “known dangerous web page.” “Known” to be dangerous–yeah, right.

      This is lowering my trust in the quality of Norton’s assessments.

      A former Symantec CEO is the chairman of the Microsoft board of directors and led the search that culminated in the selection of Satya Nadella. Now consider the ongoing critique of  Windows 10 around here. Hmm…

       

      1 user thanked author for this post.
    • #202106 Reply

      bjm
      AskWoody Lounger

      If you do not own the website, you cannot submit the website to Norton Safe Web for evaluation. However, you can write a review for that particular website, share your experiences and also rate the website which can help other users.

      https://support.norton.com/sp/en/us/home/current/solutions/kb20090410134005EN_EndUserProfile_en_us

      You may Sign In and post review for askwoody.com here:
      https://safeweb.norton.com/report/show?url=askwoody.com

      • This reply was modified 2 weeks ago by  bjm.
      • This reply was modified 2 weeks ago by  bjm.
      2 users thanked author for this post.
    • #202113 Reply

      Geoff King
      AskWoody Lounger

      For many years I used Norton and have done volunteer support to the forums, but now use Kaspersky for the last couple of years.

      It installs/uninstalls easily, and I have never had an issue with it. NO FPs, either !

      Symantec preferably need to employ its coders AFTER they leave school, not while they’re still in junior high…………..

    • #202115 Reply

      bjm
      AskWoody Lounger

      RDRguy,

      I also receive confirmation “Thank you for your submission” email and then nada.
      Happy to read Symantec Enterprise Channel works for your submissions.
      My experience reflects  #202106.

      • This reply was modified 2 weeks ago by  bjm.
      • This reply was modified 2 weeks ago by  bjm.
      2 users thanked author for this post.
    • #202170 Reply

      bjm
      AskWoody Lounger

      You’d know better than me regarding Symantec support & SEP.
      https://community.norton.com/en/forums/unblocking-website-2

      • This reply was modified 1 week, 6 days ago by  bjm.
      • This reply was modified 1 week, 6 days ago by  bjm.
      1 user thanked author for this post.
    • #202179 Reply

      bjm
      AskWoody Lounger

      Respectfully, 202097 does not work by my experience, by Norton documentation and by Norton Community user reports for A4 > B5 > C7 submissions.

      Regards w Respect

    Please follow the -Lounge Rules- no personal attacks, no swearing, and politics/religion are relegated to the Rants forum.

    Reply To: Norton Safe Web giving a spurious warning about AskWoody

    You can use BBCodes to format your content.
    Your account can't use Advanced BBCodes, they will be stripped before saving.

    Your information: