On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 11:46:12 -0000, "Andrew Aris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This has been something I've wondered about for a while, its a good idea for > e-mails to carry some kind of "passed" tag from AV systems only if it > actually means something. Which as just a plain text, easily duplicatable > signature it doesn't in-fact as recent Netsky variants are busy proving its > worse than not having it. So why don't the AV vendors use for example PGP to > sign mails? Surely this would give the process some meaning? The main reason an Antivirus company would spend the resources on adding code to append a message to outgoing mail is for marketing purposes. It gets their product name out there. -- Troy _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
