> This completely misses the point. I do not completely agree ... > When a new virus is discovered, it is > essential that there is a RAPID response to the threat. ... I agree...
> ...The idead of > handing the critter over to a committee to decide it's name is, quite > frankly, plain bonkers. Why? Why can't we handle not yet named viruses as 'unnamed' or we use a standardized (by ISO?) method to generate a numeric code that consists of a classification in categories and a sequential number and probably some kind of checksum or hash until the virus gets an official name? _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
