Partner links. Some links on this site are paid partner links, marked as such wherever they appear. If you buy through one, Burksled s.r.o. earns a commission and you pay no more than you otherwise would. How this site is funded.
By Karen Taylor, director of publication|Published |Last reviewed

Corrections log

A site that never publishes a correction is not a site that never makes mistakes. This is the public record of ours: what was wrong, what it says now, and when it changed.

What gets logged here

Any correction that changes what a reader would reasonably conclude — a wrong specification, an unsupported claim, a missing caveat, a misattributed source. Spelling fixes, broken-link repairs and layout changes are not logged. Entries are never removed, and a corrected claim is restated rather than merely deleted, so that you can see what was wrong.

2026

  • 23 September 2026 · Norton AntiVirus Plus article

    Bundled VPN and backup allowance. An earlier version stated that the tier “bundles a VPN and 1 GB of cloud backup”. Norton Secure VPN is a Norton 360 component and is not in the AntiVirus Plus tier, and the backup figure was wrong — Norton lists 2 GB for this tier. Both statements were replaced and the page now carries an explicit “not included” section.

  • 23 September 2026 · Norton AntiVirus Plus article

    Device and platform coverage. An earlier version said “one subscription covers your PC, Mac, and mobile devices” and presented multi-device coverage as an advantage of the tier. It is a single-device licence and does not cover Android or iOS. Corrected throughout, including in the summary box.

  • 23 September 2026 · Norton AntiVirus Plus article

    What exploit mitigation does. An earlier version said exploit protection “patches the way your browser and Office apps behave”. Exploit mitigation blocks exploitation techniques at runtime; it patches nothing. Only the software vendor’s own update does that. Rewritten, with the complementary role of patching made explicit.

  • 23 September 2026 · Norton AntiVirus Plus article

    Unsourced laboratory claim. An earlier version asserted that independent laboratories had “repeatedly placed Norton at or near the top of detection-rate charts”, with no source, no test round and no date. Removed and replaced with a sourced, dated explanation of what laboratory scores measure, linking to AV-TEST, AV-Comparatives and SE Labs directly.

  • 23 September 2026 · Norton AntiVirus Plus article

    Value comparison without evidence. An earlier version claimed the bundle “typically works out cheaper” than assembling equivalent tools separately. We hold no pricing evidence for that comparison, so the claim was removed rather than hedged.

  • 23 September 2026 · Norton AntiVirus Plus article

    False reader-testimonial framing. An earlier version was presented as a “reader story” and a “reader-submitted story”. It was neither. The page is editorial content by a named author and is now labelled as such. This site publishes no reader testimonials, no invented reviews and no star ratings; see the editorial policy.

  • 23 September 2026 · Norton AntiVirus Plus article

    Promotional closing copy. Text urging readers to “grab” the product and describing it as “a very hard product to beat” was replaced with a conditional recommendation that names five situations in which the product is the wrong purchase.

  • 23 September 2026 · Site-wide

    Tracking removed and disclosed. A previous build of this site loaded a script that used browser storage and made a background network request. It was removed. The site now sets no cookie, uses no browser storage and makes no third-party request of any kind; the cookie policy explains how to verify that in your own browser. The retired script path is kept as an empty file only so that cached copies of old pages do not request something that no longer exists.

Reporting an error

Write to [email protected] with the page address and, where you can, a source. We aim to acknowledge within five working days. Reports are welcome from readers, from the vendors we write about and from their competitors alike; we do not treat a correction request differently because of who sent it. The procedure and the timescales are set out in the editorial policy.