Re: Firewalls and Cryptography
- From: Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers <usenet-2006@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 18 Oct 2006 14:29:32 GMT
BobS <noone@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers" <usenet-2006@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
BobS <noone@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
No doubt you can write a virus that will be "new" for a brief period
and after it hits the first computer - it's no longer new.
Not true. A new virus remains new to any virus scanner as long as
noone has detected and analyzed it and created a signature for the
respective virus scanner. If the virus keeps a low profile that can
be quite a while.
My unstated assumption was that the virus did it's dirty work and was
detected by a user. Doesn't need a signature file made by an AV
company to have a "detected" stamp placed on it. Like anything else,
it only remains new until used once....
You're still wrong, because a virus may very well do its "dirty work"
without being spotted by a user if it keeps a low profile (i.e. doesn't
interfere with the user's day-to-day work). And unless a signature is
created for it the virus still remains new to anyone else despite being
spotted by a user.
cu
59cobalt
--
"If a software developer ever believes a rootkit is a necessary part of
their architecture they should go back and re-architect their solution."
--Mark Russinovich
.
- References:
- Firewalls and Cryptography
- From: popboyz69
- Re: Firewalls and Cryptography
- From: Volker Birk
- Re: Firewalls and Cryptography
- From: BobS
- Re: Firewalls and Cryptography
- From: Volker Birk
- Re: Firewalls and Cryptography
- From: BobS
- Re: Firewalls and Cryptography
- From: BobS
- Re: Firewalls and Cryptography
- From: Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers
- Re: Firewalls and Cryptography
- From: BobS
- Firewalls and Cryptography
- Prev by Date: Re: false portscan alarm
- Next by Date: Re: false portscan alarm
- Previous by thread: Re: Firewalls and Cryptography
- Next by thread: Re: Firewalls and Cryptography
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
