On Apr 6, 2005 8:19 PM, Guillaume Arcas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't see how making signatures using sigtool would violate any > commercial scanner... > Or did I miss something ?
It's mostly in the way sigtool makes the signatures, by running the commercial scanners on various parts of the suspect file, thereby automagically reverse-enginering their signatures. And it usually states somewhere in the commercial software's license what you can and can't do with it... sigtool being something that wouldn't be allowed. It doesn't really matter... it only worked for simple virusses anyway... most sigs generated in this way are far from optimal. -- Mark Janssen -- maniac(at)maniac.nl -- pgp: 0x357D2178 | ,''`. | Unix / Linux Open-Source and Internet Consultant @ Snow.nl | : :' : | Maniac.nl MarkJanssen.nl NerdNet.nl Unix.nl | `. `' | Skype: markmjanssen ICQ: 129696007 irc: FooBar on undernet | `- | _______________________________________________ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
