Yesterday, PC Magazine broke the news that Symantec/Norton had "released a virus definition update that incorrectly identified Solid Oak's CyberSitter filtering program as a virus." Naturally, that wreaked havoc on Solid Oak's customer base. To Solid Oak: I sympathize. Years ago, a wrote a simple Web-based performance test for PC Pitstop that Symantec misidentified as a virus. Getting Norton to fix their detecti Yesterday, PC Magazine broke the news that Symantec/Norton had “released a virus definition update that incorrectly identified Solid Oak’s CyberSitter filtering program as a virus.” Naturally, that wreaked havoc on Solid Oak’s customer base.To Solid Oak: I sympathize. Years ago, a wrote a simple Web-based performance test for PC Pitstop that Symantec misidentified as a virus. Getting Norton to fix their detection was a long and frustrating process, although it was eventually corrected, more or less. They certainly never apologized, admitted they were wrong, or offered any help to us, our tech support department, or our customers.Today, there’s still a warning on that particular test page to reassure people who may still have old antiviruses: Note: Some versions of Norton Antivirus erroneously report the “Sockets de Trois” trojan during the Internet upload test. I thought I was alone in thinking that, in some ways, Norton Antivirus was worse than the viruses it was intended to combat. Apparently not. The PC Magazine article goes on to say: This is the third time in less than a year that Symantec’s Norton products have caused severe damage to computers running CYBERsitter software offerings, said Brian Milburn, president of Solid Oak Software, in a statement. “In my opinion, Norton products are worse than any virus I can think of,” he said. Amen, Brother. Software Development