| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1092152696.560.44.camel@localhost> From: frank at knobbe.us (Frank Knobbe) Subject: AV Naming Convention On Tue, 2004-08-10 at 10:34, Glenn_Everhart@...kone.com wrote: > Give the AV companies a bit of mercy though: they are called upon to > analyze virii with ever less lead time, and need to pick names sometimes > before full behavior is even known (as it seems to me from watching > them). > > Given the time allowed to do this work, it seems a cross reference after > the fact is probably the best one can hope for. Perhaps they could elect one person (of each AV shop) to be a naming mediator between the organizations. Competition is still ensured... after all, everyone wants to get it out first. Here's another incentive. First one out to propose a new virus/strain can give it a name. All prominent AV shops could, to help industry and consumers (marketing opportunity here), come to an agreement that governs how names are standardized. First representative of an AV shop that raises the hand says "We got a new one! Can't give details of course since you are a competitor. But if you find the same thing in your research, let's call it Humptydumpty-2." Whoever finds the virus first has first choice on the name. No sharing of information required, just agreement on a name. Is that so hard? Regards, Frank -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20040810/f3f57f2f/attachment.bin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists