guenther 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. Perhaps your question is more general, not only the clamav database, but about a taxonomy for viruses. 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). -- René Berber _______________________________________________ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
