Re: (no subject)

[Harlan Carvey <keydet89 () yahoo com>]

Barry,

> I think the whole AV naming issue is, though
> problematic, the least of 
> our problems.  I think you hit the nail on the head
> here, Harlan.

One other thing I'd like to throw into the mix.  This
whole discussion is being viewed, it seems to me from
the wrong perspective.  The attitude that the entire
A/V industry should have a common naming convention
seems to be coming from the open source camp...while
A/V companies aren't necessarily open source. 
Companies in general are about making money, and you
do that through establishing and maintaining
competitive advantages.  Expending resources (ie,
people, money, time, etc) on an endeavor to establish
and maintain a common naming scheme is an expenditure
that has very little (if any) ROI...it can't be
justified to investors.

How are A/V companies competitive?  They identify and
analyze malware, and update their products.  Doing it
faster and better than the next guy is the key. 
Slowing that process down to coordinate with other
companies dissolves the advantage.  Let's say I
discover a piece of malware, and call a round table
meeting...only to find out that none of the other
members have discovered the malware yet.  My advantage
goes bye-bye.

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