Norton Internet Security SymError SymWinOpen

Sven · Mar 6, 2005

I'm certainly not the first to write about this subject, but I came
across it after buying a new PC with NIS on it and it messed up my
site without telling or yelling.

I solved it by this statement in the <head></head>
<script src=http://www.mydomain.com/norton.js></script>
and the script at http://www.mydomain.com/norton.js contains the
follwing code:
function undonorton(){
infected=false;
tmp=window.onerror;
if (tmp!=null){
tmp=tmp.toString();
if (tmp!=null)
if (tmp.indexOf('Sym')>=0)
infected=true;
}
if (infected){
window.open = null;
window.open = SymRealWinOpen;
window.onunload = null;
window.onload = null;
window.onerror = null;
}
}
undonorton();

I also call this script just before any window.open statement;

It works for me.

Richard Cornford · Mar 6, 2005

Sven said:
I'm certainly not the first to write about this subject, but I came
across it after buying a new PC with NIS on it and it messed up my
site without telling or yelling.

I solved it by this statement in the <head></head>
<script src=http://www.mydomain.com/norton.js></script>
and the script at http://www.mydomain.com/norton.js contains the
follwing code:

It works for me.

You have wasted your time. You have encountered one specific
configuration of one version of a content inserting/re-writing proxy
(operating as an Internet security program) and attempted to reverse its
actions. Norton don't have to do much to render your script obsolete
(change the names of the functions it uses), and very little more to
render its entire strategy invalid (e.g. dynamically generate the
function names, or closure-wrap the original functions so that they
become inaccessible to other scripts on the same page, and so cannot be
restored by local scripts). And every other content-inserting/re-writing
proxy is still having a similar effect on your site. (and if the
significant problem is the opening of new windows then every pop-up
window blocking technique is probably having a similar detrimental
effect).

Trying to fight these things is just going to provoke an arms race, in
which the software operating on the client computer will always be able
to win because it doesn't have to overburden a web site by downloading a
huge mass of script as its contribution to the fight.

The solution that works, and works for everyone, is to stop relying on
the ability to do things that users (and the writers of Internet
security programs) regard as potential sources of abuse (i.e. not trying
to open new window, not relying on ActiveX, etc,).

Richard.

Sven · Mar 7, 2005

Richard Cornford said:
You have wasted your time. You have encountered one specific
configuration of one version of a content inserting/re-writing proxy
(operating as an Internet security program) and attempted to reverse its
actions. Norton don't have to do much to render your script obsolete
(change the names of the functions it uses), and very little more to
render its entire strategy invalid (e.g. dynamically generate the
function names, or closure-wrap the original functions so that they
become inaccessible to other scripts on the same page, and so cannot be
restored by local scripts). And every other content-inserting/re-writing
proxy is still having a similar effect on your site. (and if the
significant problem is the opening of new windows then every pop-up
window blocking technique is probably having a similar detrimental
effect).

I was offenced by the fact that Norton molests my work. Maybe with the
best intentions, but anyhow without telling my visitors that it is
doing so.
Looking for infor on the subject on forums, I found the same complains
with the same examples since 2002/2003. It's probably very simple for
them to change the codes, but my simple script (I made it even more
simple) tackles what they are using since 2002.

Trying to fight these things is just going to provoke an arms race, in
which the software operating on the client computer will always be able
to win because it doesn't have to overburden a web site by downloading a
huge mass of script as its contribution to the fight.

Provoke? An arms race?
I'll probably better get rid of Nortons crap by sueing them for molest
on my works and violating my intellectual rights.

The solution that works, and works for everyone, is to stop relying on
the ability to do things that users (and the writers of Internet
security programs) regard as potential sources of abuse (i.e. not trying
to open new window, not relying on ActiveX, etc,).

Richard.

The solution against crime, and that works for everyone, is to control
everybody at alltimes so they won't do things that society (and the
writers of laws at any point in time) consider to be illegal or
potential illegal (i.e. driving in a car nearby an airport with a
beard on your chin and a piece of cloth on your head).

Opening a new window can be very use- and meaningfull.

symError	0	Jan 24, 2005
why aspnet adds these scripts?	4	Aug 23, 2005
Windows.open source code	2	Sep 20, 2006
Mysterious code appears in web pages.	1	Dec 16, 2003
Visual Studio.NET 2003, Norton Internnet Security 2005 & debugging	6	Oct 17, 2005
JavaScript Troubles	9	Oct 7, 2006
beginners question on arrays	3	May 3, 2005
regular expression	2	Aug 31, 2003

Norton Internet Security SymError SymWinOpen

Sven

Richard Cornford

Sven

Ask a Question

Similar Threads

Members online

Forum statistics

Latest Threads