Re: How should I interpret these virus statements by F-Prot

On May 4, 10:18 am, "Sebastian G." <s...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
RedForeman wrote:
I got it, I just don't believe it...

Hm... seems you like have a problem with reality.

and don't want to argue about it because I don't know as much about the

> subject as you...

Well, let me rephrase this: You don't know what a virus scanner works like,
where its limits are and how to use it correctly. Yet you want to use it to
increase the security of your computer system. May I call BULL***?

I used to love playing that game.... Bulllll ***....

Virus scanners work on signatures... signature based scanners see the
'signature' of the virus in a file, thus reacting to the file's finger-
print on/in the file. right or wrong? and no I didn't google it...
yet...

Ok, a fully patched OS, sitting behind a firewall, with properly setup
ACLs and firewall rules will be as protected from the external world
as a pc with virus scanners, sitting behind the same firewall... that
much I agree.... both machines are protected by inbound rules, access
list, and packet rules.... if the perimeter had AV scanning there,
then you wouldn't need a desktop AV solution...

Well, my web saavy friend likes to get on the web and look at old car
pictures.... one day his friend sent him a link that sent him to a
page that he downloaded... and the rest is history....

Isn't alot of this trivial? We're splitting hairs when it's all said
and done....

The fact remains, security is a state of mind, and is relative to the
situation, the setup, configuration, etc....

.