Re: Clamav

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Tim:
>> If you read the reviews of anti-virus software, from time to time, you
>> will see that none of them are 100% effective.  The last review I read
>> came to the conclusion that the most effective checkers only managed to
>> find about 60% of the viruses, and not all the same viruses.  That is a
>> pretty poor rating - just a bit less than half will get through.

jdow:
> The last time I ran though a complete rating of AV tools none of them were
> as bad as you declare. Please enhance your assertions with facts not
> fantasy. It makes your assertions stronger.

It's been a while since I last bothered to check up on software that I
don't run, however "60%" was the effectiveness rating at that time, and
it did draw (internet) headlines.  Are you seriously telling me that you
hadn't encountered that?  I'm talking about news stories that circulated
somewhere around a year ago, if I recall correctly.  It was notably
surprising because of that low effectiveness rate, even running multiple
anti-virus software still left a lot undetected.  At the time, it was
used to sink the boot into the silly notion that anti-virus software was
enough to protect you from bad software.

 From time to time, the figure will change, but there can't be any sane
argument that they're 100% effective, as it's simply not possible.

I didn't bookmark the info, since I've no desire to go bookmarking every
tidbit that I come across, but it's not hard to Google search this sort
of thing, and come across quite a lot of less-than-encouraging info:

http://www.anti-malware-test.com/?q=taxonomy/term/17
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antivirus_software#Effectiveness
http://blogs.cisco.com/security/comments/the_effectiveness_of_antivirus_on_new_malware_samples/
http://www.zdnet.com.au/why-popular-antivirus-apps-do-not-work-139264249.htm

-- 
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.  I
read messages from the public lists.



-- 
users mailing list
users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
[Index of Archives]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [Fedora Magazine]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Summer Coding]     [Fedora Laptop]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [SSH]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Libvirt Users]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux