full-disclosure - AV Naming Convention

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: abaker at gmail.com (ASB)
Subject: AV Naming Convention

===
But you're right, the response time should not be compromised. I still
believe that agreeing on a single name after the initial releases is not
just possible, but would benefit all involved.
===

Agreed.

-ASB

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 11:40:20 -0500, Frank Knobbe <frank@...bbe.us> wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-08-10 at 10:06, Randal, Phil wrote:
> > [...]  I for one would rather all the antivirus
> > vendors came up with their own names if it meant that
> > detection/disinfection patterns came out hour earlier.
> 
> And the reason the name of the virus can not be changed after said hour
> is what exactly? Agreeing on a name does not mean that they have to
> delay release of signatures.
> 
> Perhaps new sigs can be released with candidate names, but then shortly
> thereafter changed to an agreed upon, standardized name.
> 
> "...in other news, the new virus which the industry now calls
> NewSucker-1, caused havoc amongst those that...."
> 
> Contrast that to:
> 
> "...in other new, the new virus which the industry calls NewSuck-A or
> SuckThis-1, which is also known by the name of SuckTrojan.95 or
> Underloader-13, caused havoc amongst those that..."
> 
> But you're right, the response time should not be compromised. I still
> believe that agreeing on a single name after the initial releases is not
> just possible, but would benefit all involved.
> 
> Regards,
> Frank