Reply to post: WS.Reputation.1 detection anyone?

Attention, small biz using Symantec AV: Smash up your PCs, it's the safest thing to do


WS.Reputation.1 detection anyone?

As a software developer, don't even get me started on their idiotic WS.Reputation.1 detection idea.

Whoever came up with it should be fired with extreme prejudice! How Symantec hasn't been sued for loss of business yet is completely beyond me.

Basically their AV software will flag a file as dangerous - and *automatically quarantine or even delete it* - not because heuristics have detected something wrong or malicious with the code itself, but because their software hasn't yet seen that exact executable file around enough.

You can imagine what happens every time a developer releases an update to their software.

This is really bad because users may think that the software distributed by a particular developer includes malware, or they may decide to not install the program as it may not be worth the potential trouble.

The developer in turn can then either contact Symantec (yeah, imagine if we had to contact every AV software vendor before a new release) or wait for the issue to resolve itself: eventually enough Symantec users will have upgraded to the new version of your application and the file will stop being flagged as dangerous.

Until that happens... what you have is a potential loss of business, and your company's reputation tarnished because of a false positive generated by a completely stupid idea.

So no, I'm not sorry to see Symantec facing this. Serves them right, and their (lack of) response so far shows exactly what kind of company they are.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019