Lawsuit Claims Symantec "Scareware" Warns Of Fake Threats To Sell Upgrades

[beer]

The Registry Mechanic trial software a user claims showed him fake errors to convince him to pay for a full $29.99 version.

Security firms often warn users about “scareware”: malicious software that performs fake antivirus scans and then demands the user pay for a cleanup. Now a lawsuit claims that the world’s top antivirus firm, Symantec, is itself a scareware scammer.

James Gross, a resident of Washington State, filed what he intends to be a class action lawsuit against Symantec in a Northern District California court Tuesday. Gross claims that Symantec defrauds consumers by running fake scans on their machines, with results designed to bully users into upgrading to a paid version of the company’s software.

“The Scareware does not conduct any actual diagnostic testing on the computer,” the complaint reads.

Instead, Symantec intentionally designed its Scareware to invariably report, in an extremely ominous manner, that harmful errors, privacy risks, and other computer problems exist on the user’s PC, regardless of the real condition of the consumer’s computer. Furthermore, the scareware does not, and cannot, provide the benefits promised by Symantec. Accordingly, consumers duped into purchasing software that does not function as advertised, and in fact, has very little (if any) utility.

In the complaint, Gross goes on to describe his experience of running a Symantec scan with the company’s Registry Mechanic software he found on Symantec’s PCTools.com. After the scan’s results showed his computer contained “high priority” errors and its “system health” was “low,” he paid $29.99 to resolve the problems. Gross says he later hired computer forensics experts who found that Symantec’s scan always produced those disturbing results, and that the errors it found were “not credible threats to a computer’s functionality.”

When I reached out to Symantec, the company responded in a statement that it “does not believe the lawsuit has merit and will vigorously defend the case.”

“The Norton and PC Tools solutions at issue are designed to improve the system performance of our customers’ devices in terms of speed, maintain the health of their machines, and protect our customers’ information,” the statement continues. “The optimization and privacy functions of these solutions fix registry errors, wipe computer usage, and shred deleted items. Some include additional functionality such as recovery tools to restore lost items. Several independent third parties have tested and reviewed these products very favorably, verifying the effectiveness of their functionality.”

Gross’s most extreme claim, that Symantec’s software has no purpose, will no doubt be difficult to defend in court. And when I tested Registry Mechanic on my machine, it didn’t ask me to pay for the full version. Despite finding many so-called “high priority” issues, the software resolved them for free.

But Symantec certainly has a history of exaggerating threats to boost sales. In one message that Symantec showed in 2010 to users whose antivirus subscriptions expired, it warned that ”Any second now a virus might infect your computer, malicious malware might be installed, or your identity may be stolen. Maybe things will be OK for a while longer. Then again, maybe cybercriminals are about to clean out your bank account. The choice is yours: Protect yourself now, or beg for mercy.”

After users complained about those extortion-like tactics, Symantec soon backed off and changed the message, claiming it was meant to be a joke.

Gross’s lawsuit, of course, goes beyond alleging mere fearmongering to actual fraud. And as the trial goes forward, it may be Symantec’s engineers, not just its marketing department, that have to answer his accusations.

(

source)

Looks like a case of a bandit wearing a banker's uniform. <_< I have seen those Norton warning messages on a brand-new laptop. It is BS.

My question is how does this editor claim Symantec are the top antivirus firm? Maybe 10 years ago?

[LeetPirate]

This isn't illegal though, the US gov't warns of fake threats to pass new freedom stripping laws all the time. If fooling stupid people were a crime, many companies would be out of business. The thing is that consumers will spend money anyway so the idea is to get them to spend the money on your products instead of competing products.

[grouchysmurf]

This isn't illegal though, the US gov't warns of fake threats to pass new freedom stripping laws all the time. If fooling stupid people were a crime, many companies would be out of business. The thing is that consumers will spend money anyway so the idea is to get them to spend the money on your products instead of competing products.

Unfortunately, I must agree here. People are far too willing to be led by the nose.

Advertisement does this daily, lord knows if you do not have that product or service,

life will come to an end as you know it.........There is an animal that is like this....

I think they call it a Lemming.

[AlienForce1]

Do not know how it is in other countries, but here there is a regulation (law) that says that false advertising is punished ...

[beer]

false advertising is i

Do not know how it is in other countries, but here there is a regulation (law) that says that false advertising is punished ...

False advertising is illegal here in the USA also.

But the thing is Symantec has not been proven guilty in a court of law, and I personally don't use their antivirus so I can't make make an accurate assertion about the article's scareware claims.

Although, a lot of antivirus firms base their marketing on customers' security fears, I personally think there should be a fine line between selling prevention protection and selling threats that do not exist.

It is up to the prosecutor to show evidence to prove that Symantec mislead its customers by displaying threats that do not exist. If they can't, they will just be another case of marketing fail. I do agree with the perspective that people should do their homework before buying stuff, but I don't think not everyone understands there is an alternative option to solving computing problems.

[grouchysmurf]

Do not know how it is in other countries, but here there is a regulation (law) that says that false advertising is punished ...

Very true....but you have to listen or read the specific wording....companies pay advertisers alot of $$$ to keep with in the letter of the law. They use generalizations such as "WARNING!!! You may be infected by a virus. To diagnose this potential problem you need to upgrade to the full security suite...." as an example. Now imagine that sentence in a well designed frightening looking warning box splashed across your desktop....nothing false in what was said, but good aggressive advertisement to catch the not so knowing user into thinking they need to buy the product.

I just think people need to wise up a bit more and stop being led so easily. If this type of advertisement did not work, the ad people would not use it so much.