René Berber wrote:
> Perhaps your question is more general, not only the clamav database,
> but about a taxonomy for viruses. The way I see it, when a new virus
> is found, the developers or database maintainers try to get the
> detection strings ASAP and would not like to loose time looking up
> rules for naming, which is a very different situation from say a
> biologist classifying a live virus. I think a taxonomy would not be
> welcomed and we can expect all kinds of names (dots, dashes, spaces,
> upper- lower-case, slashes, etc. don't have a meaning).
Perhaps a per-engine taxonomy is natural - indeed it seems to be inevitable!
How about a serial-number kind of taxonomy, then -
clamav.1
clamav.2
clamav.3
...
clamav.48722
...
with friendly-names being attached to the virus, AFTER the developer has
submitted into the database? After the dust has settled, there should be
plenty of time to agree on what to call each virus.
--
Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.964.4554 x902
Hispanic Business Inc./HireDiversity.com Software Engineer
perl -e"map{y/a-z/l-za-k/;print}shift" "Jjhi pcdiwtg Ptga wprztg,"
_______________________________________________
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
