Re: [sniffer] F-Prot and netsky

[Matt]

F-Prot prompted me for an upgrade of the program when I logged in this morning (full download and install process).  I assume that this is meant to take care of the issue in not catching Mydoom.F.  Before that I was showing definitions that were last updated on the 18th.  Everyone should log onto their servers and run the updater if they aren't immediately prompted. If I'm correct, it also took several days for them to fix an issue with Mimail and that required a version upgrade. Matt Madscientist wrote: At 09:32 AM 2/24/2004, you wrote: I was wondering if anyone else is using F-prot for their virus engine in declude, and what they now think about it. Netsky was discovered on the 18th, and F-Prot actually had it posted on their website as being discovered by them on the 19th. But they didn't update their definition files to actually catch it until early this morning. This meant that netsky ran rampant under F-Prots nose for 6 days. I feel this is completely unacceptable, and I am going to change my virus engine this week unless someone can tell me that there is a good reason why I shouldn't.   Any ideas or feedback from someone using F-Prot? Thanks We recently abandoned McAfee for F-Prot. F-Prot is much more efficient and stable on our NT test platform. Though I am not pleased with the delays you mention, I'm also not willing to throw them out given the alternatives and at this point I consider the delay an aberration rather than a systemic flaw. A better strategy to dropping F-Prot, in my opinion, is to also include alternatives - since diversity is better protection anyway and the costs are well within reason. My $0.02. _M Pete McNeil (Madscientist) President, MicroNeil Research Corporation. Chief SortMonster, www.SortMonster.com. Vox 703-406-2016, Fax 703-406-2017 -- ===================================================== MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro. http://www.mailpure.com/software/ =====================================================