Re: AV Naming Convention

[Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu]

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 18:08:48 +0200, Thomas Loch said:

> 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?

1) "unnamed" runs into the 'John Doe 1', 'John Doe 2', etc. problem.  Remember
just a few months ago, two virus writers got into a grudge match and we had
multiple unknowns every day for a few weeks? ;)

2) You're researching a worm that spreads via IM, I'm researching a mass-mailer
worm.  We both grab a code, and later find out it's the same thing.  How is that
any different from the current situation?  You still have stuff you posted calling
it ISO-IM-00485, and I've posted stuff calling it ISO-MM-09453.

Attachment: _bin
Description: