 |
EDITOR NOTES
These virus definitions are FREE, the software that uses them is not. This is no different than getting a FREE update to a software you paid for.
The Download Now link yields the Intel version. See Related Links below for a link to the PPC version.
DESCRIPTION
Norton AntiVirus Defs are the latest anti-virus detection files. The installer will automatically update Norton AntiVirus 11 virus definitions and engine files to detect and repair the most recently discovered Macintosh viruses. This file is a self-extracting archive which contains the Norton AntiVirus Virus Definitions Installer. Once downloaded and expanded on your hard drive, simply double-click on the Installer and the appropriate files will be installed on your computer.
WHAT'S NEW
Version 11/16/09:
- Release notes are included in the installer package (whatsnew.txt).
REQUIREMENTS
One of the following:
- Norton AntiVirus 11.x
- Norton AntiVirus 10.2
|
|
|
 |
|  |
 | |  |
| Norton AntiVirus Definitions User Reviews (65 posts) | Write A Review |
 | Aug 8 2009 |
ARINSBLOGCDYT Just another happy user of ClamAV. I would say that unless you really hate your machine, stay away from the bloated NAV. I have had enough of it. Can you imagine I discarded it even after buying it for a decent amount! That is because I love my computer just too much to torture it with Norton. Ever since I installed Clam, my machine has become much faster and on top of that, it is yet to get affected with a virus or trojan! I also have a machine that runs on Windows XP and I use the free Avira on that one!
(Version 8/07/09) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Sep 2 2009 |
CYBORG9 Norton antivirus? The mere mention of that name should give any self respecting Mac user a case of spontaneous, explosive diarrhea. Truthfully, as has oft been said, there just ain't no active virus threat out there in the wild for Macs at the moment. One of these days, there likely will be. So, it might be wise to have some anti virus protection at one's disposal. There is, though, no reason to pay through the nose for some virus protection such as the dreaded and sickening Norton or the quite overpriced Intego VirusBarrier (they've got a $30 yearly fee for virus definition updates after one's first year of Virusbarrier use). There's the highly regarded and free ClamX.
(Version 9/1/09) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Sep 18 2009 |
IGREG The new iAntiVirus by PC Tools works nicely with background scanning (and no apparent slowing of the system), easy interface, fast updates and there is a free version. The weaknesses of ClamX AV are its fairly complex interface, weakness in providing much automatic protection. Although ClamX AV is also free. I have always used an antivirus, not because it is really needed at this time, but to be familiar & comfortable using an antivirus if & when it is really needed. Norton AV and Intego AV are both good, and while the purchase prices are not too bad, the annual virus definitions subscriptions are way too expensive.
(Version 9/18/09) | |
| Jul 16 2009 |
SCOTT_E_COLLINS Norton Antivirus feels somewhat to 'bloated' for me. I personally prefer ClamAVX. Also heard good things about McAfee, but ClamAVX seems to have the most clean, no-nonsense 'feel' to it.
(Version 7/15/09) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Jul 15 2009 |
26CAB40 This udpate is very poor. It does not improve Norton, an already poor application. I suggest ClamXAV as a better alternative.
(Version 7/14/09) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Aug 5 2009 |
Totally agree with you on the Norton part. It used to slow down my machine to a snail's speed! I even tried their latest 2009 version and although this new version does not hog as much RAM as its predecessors, it is still a nuisance as always. I finally dumped it for good and now use ClamAV and am pretty happy with it!
(Version 8/04/09) | |
| Jul 14 2009 |
MARK EVERITT Is all discussion post-2006 simply being deleted? I know it's been heated lately but some good points were made. These virus definitions can only be used with the non-free Norton AntiVirus. I'd say that this does not fit into any meaningful definition of free. Secondly, these definitions seem to be supplied separately because the automatic updating in NAV does not function under 10.5.7 (looking at the comments for NAV). Considering that Symantec deals by keeping us scared of our own shadows I'm going to be consistent to that and put it to them that using a separate installer to update definitions is an enormous gap in their protection. If automatic updating does work, then posting the definitions here is shameless (and frankly bewildering) advertising. This is a shocking state of affairs. For the record I run ClamAV, not because I fear viruses but because I work with some windows users. If they get a virus then it slows me down too (I've tried to convert them to Mac or Linux to little avail). The main free competitor to Norton on a mac is ClamXav, which has no problem with updating itself.
(Version 7/14/09) | |
| [ 2 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Jul 17 2009 |
SPRINGHEELMAC I can assure you that the auto update problem under 10.5.7 has been fixed. I had encountered it as well. Also, NAV was not even RUNNING under 10.5.7 for a few weeks after it came out. But I noticed it has been auto updating AND scanning successfully for a few weeks now. The fix was delivered via an update, so if you have the problem, hit "Update everything now" on your LiveUpdate app and make sure you install everything.
(Version 7/17/09) | |
| Jul 17 2009 |
MARK EVERITT Thank you for your reply SpringheelMac. I don't use NAV however. I was just raising some questions. Unfortunately many of my comments have been removed lately so my position may have been confusing. At least these updates are now filed under 'update' rather than 'free'. I am pragmatic when it comes to antivirus software though. As I work with so many windows users, if they get a virus it has a knock on effect on me. I'm in no real danger myself though, so I see no reason to pay for NAV, which is notoriously difficult to remove. It's still in my best interests to screen email for windows viruses, so I use ClamAV.
(Version 7/17/09) | |
| Sep 22 2005 |
SEBRIEL /X\ Completely Useless I have been using Apple Computers since 1990, all the time downloading , searching in the internet, and i have never had a virus.....
(Version 9/22/05) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Sep 22 2005 |
OPNSRC I think that some people might like to have a look at ClamXav. It is free and quite good.
(Version 9/22/05) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Sep 27 2005 |
ANONYMOUS /bin/true or IEHBR14 will do as good a job as Clamav on any of the real OSX viruses that are "live" in the wild.
(Version 9/22/05) | |
| Aug 19 2009 |
FRANKHOGG I've been using Macs since 1984 and I don't use any "AntiVirus" software, free or paid for simply because THERE ARE NO VIRUSES FOR A MAC! Never have been. I've never had a problem... NEVER! Do you know why there are two lion statues in front of the NY Public Library? The answer is they keep the elephants away. Hey it works just as well as any anti virus software for the Mac does.
(Version 8/18/09) | |
| [ 2 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Sep 24 2009 |
EFF Normally, I wouldn't have replied to a comment like this but since you're boasting about your historical knowledge of the Mac (since 1984, no less!!) ... yes, THERE HAVE BEEN viruses specifically targeting Mac OS (Classic) *prior* to OS X. It wasn't even a fraction of the poo-ware targeting Windows back then but it existed nonetheless. Kindly point your browser to: "http://bit.ly/macviruses", scroll to "7.0 What viruses can affect Mac users?", read, and in the future please refrain from spreading false statements disguised as historical knowledge. Now, there's nothing wrong with not knowing everything (noone does, except for Stephen Fry), but there's everything wrong WITH SHOUTING falsehoods disguised as facts.
(Version 9/24/09) | |
| Sep 25 2009 |
FRANKHOGG As you said the document you referred us to dates to January of 2000 and deals with Classic, not OSX. I do not, nor can I, attest to the veracity of that 9+ year old web page. But I will restate that I have never had a virus since starting to use Macs in 1984. Even Leo Laporte agrees with me but clarifies it by stating that there has never been a virus "in the wild" for Macs. Proof of concept perhaps but nothing that would support wasting money, time and system resources on virus software. When and if it becomes a problem then I will address it, not before. Google, "leo laporte mac virus" for more info. I don't know who you are but most techies know who Leo Laporte is. I feel that I am in good company and stand by my original statement. You can Google my name too and you'll see I've been around a good long while. As far as I'm concerned you can use anti virus software, wear tin foil hats whatever floats your boat. But in my many years of experience using and servicing Macs I have never had a virus, trojan horse etc. problem. Take that for what it's worth.
(Version 9/24/09) | |
| Sep 22 2005 |
AVFOLK NAV itself has resulted in far greater risk and instability of the computers I oversee than any OSX virus. Their scare tactics issued earlier this week were a sad attempt to sell more software and updates. SHAME ON SYMANTIC for their cheap publicity stunt. If you want a challenge -- try removing NAV sometime and see what happens. Its UGLY and causes untold hardship. All good reasons to NUKE NAV. The computer you save may be your own.
(Version 9/22/05) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Sep 8 2005 |
ANONYMOUS I mean seriously, there is no point for it. IT takes up space on your hard drive, and is a tough little cookie to uninstall, just like the others have said, completely useless, and protects you from nothing. Norton you'll make more money sticking to windows folk!
(Version 9/08/05) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
|
| View all 65 posts >> |
|
