At 08:56 AM 11/30/2001 -0500, Will Rodger wrote: >We also know that virus scanners are remarkably bad at picking up and >stopping new malware. If they were any good at all, new viri and Trojans >would not spread the way they do.
That's a fair statement, since the average Windows user either doesn't use antivirus ware or doesn't keep it updated. But crank up the paranoia dial a notch -- the Sep. 11 terrorists weren't exactly stupid -- and that's arguably a different story. >How hard would it be to design a Trojan horse that could get around >current scanners? Not that difficult, I suspect, with even the passive participation (merely providing tech info, not redesigning) of the antivirus firms. But the FBI would want to guard against two other possibilities: Future antivirus software detecting an installed ML, and future antivirus software detecting an attempt to install ML. One wit recommended a way to get a wild version of ML: Create a Hotmail account with the appropriate-sounding name, post the appropriately suspicious-sounding statements in the appropriate fora, and wait for the attachments to come in. :) -Declan --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
