Norton Alert for Sleepyhead

[Leland]

I am running an older version of Sleepyhead. When I run the Norton Power Eraser, it calls out Sleepyhead as a possible problem. Has anyone else encountered this. If so, what did you do about it.

[CPAPER Paul]

I have found that more times than not, Norton is the problem ..... Just ignore Norton and continue to use SleepyHead.

Paul

[Pugsy]

Norton just doesn't know anything about SleepyHead and that's why it gets flagged.
No big deal...just tell Norton you know SH is okay and to ignore it.

[grayghost4]

I have removed all Norton utilities and anti virus from my computer ... it has never been anything but trouble .
There are much better free utilities that that one.

[Greg Riddle]

Windows firewall and Microsoft security essentials is all I've been using for a few years and never have any issues

[archangle]

Don't forget the possibility that something has infected your copy of SH after you loaded it on your computer.

Malwarebytes free version (Malwarebytes.org) is a good way to double check another anti-malware program. Malwarebytes doesn't run all the time, so it doesn't slow down your computer by having two security programs fighting each other. Get that and double check your system.

I agree. Dump Norton and find something better.

Avast free version is good for anti-malware. Turn Microsoft firewall back on because Avast Free doesn't include a firewall.

If you get a newer version of SH, go to http://www.sleepfiles.com/SH. It used to only be at sourceforge, which is getting really sketchy in their ads.

[Norton Support]

I am running an older version of Sleepyhead. When I run the Norton Power Eraser, it calls out Sleepyhead as a possible problem. Has anyone else encountered this. If so, what did you do about it.

Sorry to hear! I am Vineeth and I am from the Norton Support team. Can you please submit the file to us at http://www.Norton.com/fp so we can review it and whitelist it?

Thanks!

Vineeth
Norton Support

[grayghost4]

I see they are not computer aware enought to download it themselves

[palerider]

I see they are not computer aware enough to download it themselves

well, gray, in all fairness... you are talking about a company that hasn't been relevant or recommended in 20 years or so... this whole 'internet' thing is a bit newfangled.

[Sibbs]

Norton just doesn't know anything about SleepyHead and that's why it gets flagged.
No big deal...just tell Norton you know SH is okay and to ignore it.

I've had norton flag it a couple of times during this past year, again this morning. For those who are interested, here's their explanation of why it's flagged. Fairly opaque discussion, and they have it categorized as a high risk.

Users are given the choice to restore the file, which is what I chose. Weird quirk, though.

http://www.symantec.com/security_respon ... 99&tabid=2
"WS.Reputation.1 is a detection for files that have a low reputation score based on analyzing data from Symantec’s community of users and therefore are likely to be security risks. Detections of this type are based on Symantec’s reputation-based security technology. Because this detection is based on a reputation score, it does not represent a specific class of threat like adware or spyware, but instead applies to all threat categories.

The reputation-based system uses "the wisdom of crowds" (Symantec’s tens of millions of end users) connected to cloud-based intelligence to compute a reputation score for an application, and in the process identify malicious software in an entirely new way beyond traditional signatures and behavior-based detection techniques."

[chunkyfrog]

You never know, Vineeth may just possibly have no connection at all with Norton.
Now you can't say no one warned you.

[Sir NoddinOff]

I'm a Kaspersky fan and have used it for years.
Regarding McAfee:
This'll crack you up - warning sex and violence and swearing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKgf5PaBzyg

[Goofproof]

You never know, Vineeth may just possibly have no connection at all with Norton.
Now you can't say no one warned you.

Not Chunkyfrog ' s first lillypad!

So software designers are supposed to send every anti-virus bussiness, a copy of their code so it can be deemed safe to install of computers. I think I see Norton's Flawed plan. Doesn't sound like how real anti-virus companies, handle bussiness. Jim

[Krelvin]

Norton just doesn't know anything about SleepyHead and that's why it gets flagged.
No big deal...just tell Norton you know SH is okay and to ignore it.

I've had norton flag it a couple of times during this past year, again this morning. For those who are interested, here's their explanation of why it's flagged. Fairly opaque discussion, and they have it categorized as a high risk.

Users are given the choice to restore the file, which is what I chose. Weird quirk, though.

Doesn't really matter why Norton can't get it right... it clearly is not an issue.

So you used Pugsy's response to just ignore it since it is clearly not an issue?

[MarylandCPAPer]

I am running an older version of Sleepyhead. When I run the Norton Power Eraser, it calls out Sleepyhead as a possible problem. Has anyone else encountered this. If so, what did you do about it.

As one of the few people on this forum who will admit to using the current version of Norton and finding it useful, I have not had any negative scan results re: the most recent version of Sleepyhead. I would note that the OP is from February and the user wasn't running the current version of Sleepyhead. I also have not used Power Eraser. I am a fanatic of scanning for viruses and malware but Power Eraser hasn't been one of the tools I've explored.

It would be a terrific coincidence if we would have an employee from Norton on this board. If anyone wants to buy the Brooklyn Bridge, I may be able to sell it to you.....

The OP is probably long gone, but if anyone is wondering about using the current version of Sleepyhead in Windows 8.1, Norton doesn't seem to have any problems with it, in my experience.

Interesting that it got flagged this morning. What version of Windows are you using?, and is that the current version of SH? Just curious.