Dennis Peterson wrote:
> Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
>> On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 07:28 -0700, John Rudd wrote:
>>> (to the developers, not in answer to Burnie)
>>>
>>> See, the current name scheme needs to be fixed.  And no one responded at 
>>> all to my proposed scheme from a month or two ago.
>> Coincidentally, my very first question on this list years ago was about
>> naming conventions (or the lack thereof), too. :)
>>
>>   karsten
>>
>>
> 
> That probably means names are really not all that important in the big 
> picture.

...

> There are much more important things to be concerned with than what a 
> virus is called. 

You're awfully cavalier about what's important to other people's email. 
  The fact that they're not important to you does not mean that they are 
unimportant.

For example, under my proposed scheme, I could easily decide to:

1) reject viruses during SMTP
2) accept, but hold in quarantine, messages matching phishing sigs
3) accept, but mark as possible spam, messages matching spam sigs
    (and possibly even rating the likelihood of spam based upon a
    false-positive reputation score for the given signature source)

But, without a coherent and explicit name convention, the rules for 
doing so would be so complex as to be not be worth the effort in writing 
them.  In some cases, it's even ambiguous as to which of the above 
categories a given message falls in to.

The only people dismissing the name convention as "unimportant" are 
people who aren't paying attention to the bigger picture (in that 
they're only looking at what's important in their own part of the picture).

I'll even volunteer some of my time to help develop the name scheme 
(I've already put one such scheme forward), and to help re-organize the 
signatures that are already out there.  I'm not just complaining, I'm 
offering to be part of the solution.

Yet, all I've gotten on this, until today, is total silence.





_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html

Reply via email to