On Tue, 2004-05-04 at 10:46, Russ Phillips wrote: > Hi, > > I have a query. Most commercial AV software claims to catch something > like 70,000+ viruses. On the other hand, ClamAV claims to catch 20,000+ > viruses. > > Why the difference? Is it because McAfee, Sophos et al consider each and > every variant to be a different virus, and ClamAV doesn't? Not often. > Or does > ClamAV not detect some older viruses? Or something else?
ClamAV has not been focusing on detecting older viruses. Instead, it is ideal for detecting late-breaking and fast-spreading viruses/worms/trojans and what-not. The clamav team has been making great strides in picking up the older viruses - they recently released (.07-rc1) an OLE engine to detect macro viruses, and they added two new signature writers to work on the backlog of macro-viruses in their library. I don't think clamav will ever get completely "caught up" with the old, but they will detect most of the new outbreaks before anyone else. > > I ask because I'm planning to deploy ClamAV at work, and I want to be > able to give my boss an honest answer when he asks (as he's bound to) > why ClamAV doesn't catch as many viruses as McAfee. > -- Daniel J McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Austin Energy ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click _______________________________________________ Clamav-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clamav-users
