Re: [Full-Disclosure] (no subject)

From: Nick FitzGerald (nick_at_virus-l.demon.co.uk)
Date: 08/10/04

  • Next message: Patrik Torin: "[Full-Disclosure] RE: Full-Disclosure digest, Vol 1 #1826 - 23 msgs"
    To: full-disclosure@netsys.com
    Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:10:22 +1200
    
    

    Todd Burroughs to Frank Knobbe:

    > > Isn't the complete lack of naming standardization in the AV industry
    > > simply amazing? Imagine that were the case in science, particular
    > > medicine...
    >
    > No shit. They should at least get together and come up with some common
    > naming convention. They need to make some common "naming authority", it's
    > not difficult, we do it all the time with other software and as mentioned,
    > in all scientific disciplines. Otherwise, things become very convoluted
    > for us in the know. This is irrelevent to the general population,
    > but is necessary for the people who have to deal with these things.

    Believe it or not we know, and things are being done about it.

    The "scientific disciplines" and others you speak of don't have to deal
    with things that happen in any and all possible combinations of as
    often, as fast, polymorphically, metamorphically, combinatorially, etc
    as the AV industry does _and generally_ have had several generations of
    academic research to form, refine, toss out and start over, etc their
    classifaction and naming systems. Still, I agree that we AV
    researchers could do naming better but there is not sufficient external
    pressure to force the industry to try to do a better job of naming than
    it currently does so it has no reason to "do the hard yards" that any
    significant improvement in naming consistency will require...

    > How about it "AV guys"? (I mean to be nice here...)

    Other than a few voices wailing within the industry, there are some
    much larger scale moves afoot that just may change the "there is not
    sufficient external pressure" factor I mentioned above, though
    realistically these moves may take years rather than months to produce
    significant improvement, but they are a start...

    Regards,

    Nick FitzGerald

    _______________________________________________
    Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
    Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


  • Next message: Patrik Torin: "[Full-Disclosure] RE: Full-Disclosure digest, Vol 1 #1826 - 23 msgs"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: [Full-Disclosure] (no subject)
      ... You may work in the industry and I ... > The difference is that in designing a better naming system, ... Saying someone is ignorant without proving that only makes yourself look ... From time T until T+48h you have the "all-important hours" of confusion as ...
      (Full-Disclosure)
    • Re: [Full-Disclosure] (no subject)
      ... >You show more and more of your ignorance each time you open your mouth. ... >You are confusing two different aspects of the AV industry. ... >The difference is that in designing a better naming system, ... a lot of the confusion only comes later. ...
      (Full-Disclosure)
    • Re: [Full-Disclosure] (no subject)
      ... >> largest things blocking better naming coordination?) ... Then all vendors can rename the new strain ... The PR and marketing folk in AV ... industry as a whole" marketing moves. ...
      (Full-Disclosure)
    • Re: [Full-Disclosure] (no subject)
      ... >> Isn't the complete lack of naming standardization in the AV industry ... Then all vendors can rename the new strain ... Of course, the first thing is to form that central authority, but then again ... > the AV industry would do better than it does now, ...
      (Full-Disclosure)