Amos Shapira wrote: > Hi, > > This discussion reminded me of a water-cooler talk we had in the > office yesterday where people said that clamav is the only open-source > anti-virus and that it's falling far behind the commercial offerings.
The whole field of anti virus is a scam. The industry exists only because of crappy operating systems (hello microsoft) that propagate it. The technology used (signature detection) fails miserably when polymorphic virii are concerned. I seem to remember there was a recent test where 3 or 4 of the top products were put to the test. The best product only detected about 60% of the virii. > I use Linux desktops and mostly Linux servers (and the other guy > covers Windows for me), so I was wondering how much of this is > accurate (what are the other options and how do they stack up against > the best commercial options?). When the best of the commercial options only get about a 60% detection rate who cares? Erik -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo ----------------------------------------------------------------- "Just look at the development within Europe, where the number of Muslims is expanding like mosquitoes. Every Western woman in the EU is producing an average of 1.4 children. Every Muslim woman in the same countries is producing 3.5 children. Our way of thinking will prove more powerful than yours." -- Norwegian imam Mullah Krekar to the Oslo newspaper Dagbladet in 2006 -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
