No I do not, thats a ridiculous question. I have reason to be concerned in this 
particluar instance, lets leave it at that. I was only looking for some kind of 
technical info on these particluar variants. 


 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randal, Phil
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 4:01 PM
To: ClamAV users ML
Subject: Re: [Clamav-users] Recent viruses

Do you give risk assessments of each and every "virus" caught, then?

That would be a complete waste of time.

But, just to let you know the risks we're talking about here:

eCard stuff:  emails containing either a link to a website pushing Trojans onto 
the PCs of those stupid enough to visit; or a .zip attachment containing a 
Trojan.  The risk?  Malware on your PC, data harvesting, turning PC into a 
spambot, etc.

The phishing ones usually contain links to fake bank sites in an attempt to 
harvest people's usernames and passwords, and thence their money.
The risk is of your staff being fleeced, quickly followed by legal action by 
them against management for failure in their duty of care for their employees 
(by not blocking these phishing emails they are aiding and abetting the 
criminals).

And if you really have to argue the case individually for each and every virus 
pattern in your antivirus products' databases, you should start seeking a new 
job right now.

Cheers,

Phil


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gomes, Rich
Sent: 25 October 2007 18:20
To: ClamAV users ML
Subject: Re: [Clamav-users] Recent viruses

Dennis,
        Thanks for the reply. I understand all of what you are saying, having 
worked as a sysadmin for many years now. My issue is that even with most 
vendors using different naming conventions, they are "usually"
cross-reference in any technical info that is out there. I can't find any data 
on these messages and would like to know what other malware names they match up 
to so I can present it to management. At this point I can't even give a risk 
assessment.


Rich

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dennis Peterson
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 12:54 PM
To: ClamAV users ML
Subject: Re: [Clamav-users] Recent viruses

Gomes, Rich wrote:
> I received some emails yesterday matching the following:
> 
> Infected messages:
>     Email.Ecard-28: 2 Message(s)
>     Email.Phishing.RB-1804: 2 Message(s)
>     Email.Phishing.RB-1806: 2 Message(s)
> 
> 
> I think these are ClamAV-specific names, how can I find out more
detailed info on each one? I do not see them anywhere on the web.
> 
> 
> Any help would be greatly appreciated.

There are no naming standards and it doesn't look like any initiative to create 
one is going anywhere. The problem is each AV vendor has to call it something 
(I actually don't agree with this, but sexy names sell product). So what do you 
call a virus you've not seen before? I suppose you could submit it to all the 
other vendors' 
systems to see if they have a name for it and adopt that, but then that's a lot 
of work and there are no returns. And what if you are the first to discover it? 
You can't wait around for a committee to come up with a name so you call it 
something and release the update. As you know, within a day all the vendors 
will have discovered that same virus and will also go through this same drill.

If you think about it, vendor A using vendor B's names is an admission that 
vendor A was not the first to discover it, and that means vendor B is going to 
look better in reviews.

My bottom line is, I really don't care what they're called. A simple serial 
number would be fine with me. The names mean more to the popular press than 
anyone else on the planet because they make great headlines.
A name that is also the date discovered would be even better as I could 
voluntarily remove any old virus patterns I think are obsolete. This addresses 
another issue - AV vendors get a big plus for showing they have a bizzillion 
patterns in their database. I don't care - if that represents something that 
was an issue in 1987 it is not a problem for me today. Get rid of it.

How to get more detail? You can translate (they're hex encoded) the record for 
the the virus name and read what the pattern is. This is especially true for 
the phishing and text based "viruses". Less useful for viruses found in 
executable files.

One final point: phishing and scam mails will not necessarily have a 
corresponding identity with other vendors. They may not provide phishing and 
scam protection, for one thing, and for another the manner of detecting them is 
entirely arbitrary. Vendor A might look for embedded URL's in the message where 
vendor B might look for repeating misspelled words or unusual phrasing in the 
same message. In other words there is no guarantee of a match with any other 
vendor.

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

Reply via email to