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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 00:18:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Windows' future (reprise)

On Mon, 17 May 2010 03:48:36 BST, lsi said:

> It is mutating at approx 243% per annum, a rate which is more than
> twice as fast as Moore's Law (200% every 24 months).  I do find this
> alarming, because I want my CPU back.  So does everyone else I know.

Unfortunately, you haven't shown that the CPU actually consumed is going up by
243% or any significant fraction thereof.  Admittedly, A/V products are slowly
taking more and more resources, but nowhere near a Moore's Law rate.

Do some benchmarking.  Time how long it takes to scan a collection of 500 or so
random files using a 2007 version of your favorite A/V software and signatures,
and time how long this week's version take. The difference between the two
numbers is the CPU you can "get back". I guarantee it has no relationship
to the 243% you're complaining about (for starters, even if it *was* gaining
243% a year, that's a 243% grown rate of the 5% or so your anti-virus uses,
not of your entire CPU capacity.

> I'm not analysing infections, I'm analysing "new threats" (as defined
> by Symantec).

Read Thor's description of the difference between threats and risks.

Defending against threats doesn't consume additional CPU.
Defending against risks *may* consume additional CPU.

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia -

Powered by blists - more mailing lists