On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 17:07 -0500, René Berber wrote: > > So, in conclusion: Are my assumptions correct, that this partially is > > due to old names? Is there at least a consensus on the classified naming > > amongst AV vendors (as mentioned above)? And are dots and dashes treated > > equally these days? > > I'm not an expert, but it seems to me that the section "What is the naming > convention for viruses?" does anwswer your question about consensus and goes > further to address why some names are different (made by different people at > different times). The different syntax you noted are the result of that.
Well, it's not exactly what I'm after -- but I agree, that it might be the answer to my question anyway. > Perhaps your question is more general, not only the clamav database, but > about a > taxonomy for viruses. Kind of, yes. > 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). Agreed and understood. :) Thanks for the response... ...guenther -- char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]"; main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1: (c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}} _______________________________________________ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html