Re: [Full-Disclosure] correct names [was: 3127/tcp by Doomjuice (Kaspersky) - MyDoom takeover?]
From: dgj (dgj+_at_pitt.edu)
To: firstname.lastname@example.org Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:23:50 -0500
On Feb 9, 2004, at 2:59 PM, Nick FitzGerald wrote:
> Yes -- Deadhat (more correctly known as Vesser) was found late Friday
> or early Saturday (depending on your TZ) but this new one, DoomJuice,
> (incorrectly originally classified as a Mydoom variant and thus called
> Mydoom.C by some) has only been isolated and analysed in the last few
> Nick FitzGerald
> Computer Virus Consulting Ltd.
> Ph/FAX: +64 3 3529854
Deadhat/Vesser, DoomJuice/Mydoom.c, "more correctly known as",
"incorrectly originally classified as", ...
Is there, or will there ever be any kind of "naming authority" for
these things? I assume that most major av houses have telephones &
email access, so why isn't there any kind of agreement on names? The
lack of a single name for a threat is kind of bogus.
Is this driven only by the marketing departments at the firms?
And how does the poor, long-suffering sysadmin know what the correct
name is, google them all when the dust settles and see what gets the
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.