I would strongly bet that there is some legalese in their software license agreement that says you agree they are not liable for problems like that. It reminds me of a problem years ago with MailEssentials where they sent out a bad signature file that caused every message to be qualified as spam. If you had a rule that to delete all the definite spam (like we did), it just sat there and deleted every mail message coming into your mail server. IIRC, it was even malformed to such an extent that subsequently released signatures would not load without you taking some manual process. We lost about a half day's mail before getting it fixed (it took a while to figure out there was a problem at all, and then what the source was). They offered everybody free upgrades to the next version as a mea culpa.
________________________________ From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 4:15 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: McAfee DAT problems On top of the millions of dollars of downtime they have caused a lot of companies, I am sure the lawsuits and the fallout is going to be equally brutal. Z Edward Ziots CISSP,MCSA,MCP+I,Security +,Network +,CCA Network Engineer Lifespan Organization 401-639-3505 [email protected] From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 4:14 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: McAfee DAT problems That's a serious qa failure. And it's rather annoying that they can't remove the bad dat file from the internet in a timely fashion. -ASB: http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker Sent from my Motorola Droid On Apr 21, 2010 11:48 AM, "Erik Goldoff" <[email protected]> wrote: Anyone else heard of problems with the latest McAfee DAT (5958) ??? Erik Goldoff IT Consultant Systems, Networks, & Security ' Security is an ongoing process, not a one time event ! ' ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
