Re: Running program files on XP with non-executable extension?

From: Flash Gordon (spam_at_flash-gordon.me.uk)
Date: 11/05/05


Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 00:46:03 +0000

Leythos wrote:
> In article <1131033952.512278.87400@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> bughunter.dustin@gmail.com says...
>
>>As I said, I've been in the vx side for many years. I'm well versed on
>>both aspects of it, from antivirus perspective as well as vx
>>perspective. I'm not giving my opinion per say, I'm giving that of the
>>general consensus of both the Av and Vx side of things.
>
> That's great for them and you - not being snide here, but, as I said
> before, never seen a false positive on more than 1500 systems, and we'll
> continue to use it scanning all files on access.

It may be rare, but it does happen.
http://www.google.co.uk/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial_s&hl=en&q=cygwin+virus+false+alarm&meta=&btnG=Google+Search
I've actually seen a tarball from Cygwin be reported as a virus.

Having said that, on corporate machine I would generally set it to scan
all files myself.

-- 
Flash Gordon
Living in interesting times.
Although my email address says spam, it is real and I read it.