At 06:43 AM 3/22/2005, BitFuzzy wrote:
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
Personally, my gripe is that the product is called ClamAV. If it's expanding it's mission to protect people from everything called "malware", I'd change the name to something that indicates it's a malware detector and not a virus detector. Phishing scams are *not* viruses. Maybe change it's name to ClaMal. It'll make the O'Reilly book cover look interesting, too.I can't believe this is still going on! This got old "fast" the last time it was discussed.
But this would probably never happen. *shrug*
_______________________________________________ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
This isn't about detecting messages concerning Viagra, or getting 27,000,000 by helping some yutz in Nigeria.
The way I see it, any item regardless of it's delivery method that has the potential to do harm financially or otherwise should be stopped (IMHO) by the AV.
um, reread what you just wrote. 'any item regardless of it's delivery method that has the potential to do harm financially or otherwise'. let's see, little old ladies emailing their bank account information to MRS. MIRIAM SESE SEKO, LATE OF THE CHIEF PETROLEUM RESERVES OFFICE OF NIGERIA, doesn't pose the potential to do harm financially? How about V1c0d1n, a prescription drug, that if you order it from spam, chances are you'll never get it, because who in their right mind would file a complaint that they didn't get a prescription drug they ordered illegally over the net? No risk of financial harm there? what about a spam message for porn, and the poor yutz clicks the link and is sent instead to a kiddie porn site, and later his IP address is swept up by law enforcement and he goes to jail as a pedophile - doesn't fit your criteria?
your argument isn't consistent.
Paul Theodoropoulos http://www.anastrophe.com http://www.smileglobal.com
_______________________________________________ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
