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

Reply via email to