From: randomisedletters at hotmail.com (Random Letters)
Subject: (no subject) BORING

This is too boring. *Please* can you all desist?

Entrenched positions aren't going to be changed by this back-biting, flaming 
and personal attacks (you know who you are). You're damaging your own 
repuations on this thread. Don't forget it's all searchable on Google.

This thread has been going on for too long.

"Do you also believe you can convince MS to make Windows OpenSource just by 
posting here?" No.

"Maybe discussions such a this will wake people up, maybe there will even be 
a voiced demand from the public." Maybe not.

This isn't the forum for such 'discussions'. This is supposed to be a list 
for disclosing new and/or relevant information about security threats.

OK?

-----------------------------------------------

Dictionary.com

troll:

"An electronic mail message, Usenet posting or other (electronic) 
communication which is intentionally incorrect, but not overtly 
controversial (compare flame bait), or the act of sending such a message. 
Trolling aims to elicit an emotional reaction from those with a hair-trigger 
on the reply
key. A really subtle troll makes some people lose their minds."

I'm sure it's not "intentionally incorrect" but apart from that ...

-----------------------------------------------
    Does HoTMaiL come with a spell checker?
-----------------------------------------------

>
>On Sun, Aug 15, 2004 at 01:52:33PM +0200, Maarten wrote:
> > On Sunday 15 August 2004 04:52, Nick FitzGerald wrote:
> > > Maarten wrote:
> > yada yada.  You may work in the industry (and be blind because of it) 
>and I
> > may have an incredible high IQ (so much higher than yours that you 
>perceive
> > I'm stupid instead).
> > But the thing is, you don't know that.  So stop bashing me and showing 
>off.
> > You can shine by your actions, not by your reputation...
>
>So what is your knowledge about malware naming ?
>You know about the wildlist and its problems, Vgrep, CARO, 'naming.txt'
>and its use in the last 10 years ?
>You have ever tried to maintain and work with a malware collection ?
>You know about previous (and more in-depth) discussions on this topic ?
>You've read at least http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/1587
>and http://www.virusbtn.com/magazine/archives/200301/caro.xml
>to get a basic idea of the problem ?
>So what rational fact makes you believe you know this better than everyone
>else ?
>
>
> > All change starts small.  Maybe discussions such a this will wake people 
>up,
> > maybe there will even be a voiced demand from the public.  That DOES 
>hurt
> > sales, thus shareholders, which is what you need to have done, right ?
> > The only thing I'm sure about is, YOU will not be instrumental in this.
>
>Do you really think, there were any new ideas here ?
>For an example, here at the antiVirusTestCenter we have discussed the 
>naming
>problems for years. But even the partial solutions that have been realized
>(LOKMM, VMacro-Server) haven't caused significant changes. And this was in
>cooperation with many AV researchers.
>How should such an annoying thread like this really help ? Do you also
>believe you can convince MS to make Windows OpenSource just by posting here 
>?
>
>
> > Well, just for you, to make it simple.
> > At Time T you find a virus and name it whatever you like (just as you do 
>now).
> > >From time T until T+48h you have the "all-important hours" of confusion 
>as
> > you are so adamant to repeat at every opportunity. So let there be 
>confusion.
> > At Time T+50 you agree upon a singular standardized name and rename it.
> >
> > So, compared to now, what has changed between T and T+48 ?? Nothing.  So 
>stop
> > complaining about me messing up those "all-important hours" of yours.  
>I'm
> > not messing anything up.  I'm renaming when the panic has died down.
> > Get it now ?!?!
>
>And what is the benefit of your proposal? Have you considered that it may
>be just another source of confusion ? There could be uncoordinated
>renamings, the same malware alerts with old and new names (but this time
>from the same vendor). Adminstrators may not be able to compare scan 
>reports
>from different malware definition updates because the names changed in
>between.
>
>
> > > The first few hours _under current processes_ produce nearly all of 
>the
> > > confusion caused by naming inconsistencies.  Media outlets latch onto
> >
> > This is not a scientific fact, and I do not agree with you.
>
>I can't remember _any_ scientific fact in this thread.
>
>--
>Michel Messerschmidt           lists@...hel-messerschmidt.de
>antiVirusTestCenter, Computer Science, University of Hamburg
>
>_______________________________________________
>Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
>Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

_________________________________________________________________
It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today! 
http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger

Powered by blists - more mailing lists