[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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.
After clamav.1 the clamav part becomes redundant and adds no value.
dp
_______________________________________________
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
