Re: AV Naming Convention

[Thomas Loch <thomas8142 () freenet de>]

This should not be used as a replace for the virus-pattern-system! Only to 
have standardized names for recently discovered but not yet named viruses. 
And someone (who tells the name of a found virus nothing) can see to which 
category of viruses it belongs without remembering every name


On Tuesday 10 August 2004 19:33, you wrote:
> So if I change my name the police can't find me? ;)
>
> AV companies should be able to work with any form of ID. Use their local
> until an agreement as been made.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com
> [mailto:full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com] On Behalf Of Thomas Loch
> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 11:09 AM
> To: full-disclosure () lists netsys com
> Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] AV Naming Convention
>
> > This completely misses the point.
>
> I do not completely agree ...
>
> > When a new virus is discovered, it is
> > essential that there is a RAPID response to the threat. ...
>
> I agree...
>
> > ...The idead of
> > handing the critter over to a committee to decide it's name is, quite
> > frankly, plain bonkers.
>
> Why?
>
>
> Why can't we handle not yet named viruses as 'unnamed' or we use a
> standardized (by ISO?) method to generate a numeric code that consists of a
> classification in categories and a sequential number and probably some kind
> of checksum or hash until the virus gets an official name?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


P.S. AV companies should be able to work __together__ and that __without__ any 
kind of naming. They should find those digital bastards and neutralize them!

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