Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 11 Aug 2008 06:56:08 -0700 | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Subject | Re: [malware-list] [RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to a linuxinterfaceforon access scanning |
| |
On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 16:45:47 +0300 Mihai Donțu <mdontu@bitdefender.com> wrote:
> On Thursday 07 August 2008, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 03:49:55 +0300 > > > > Mihai Donțu <mdontu@bitdefender.com> wrote: > > > Well, here is one attempt. > > > > > > A good percentage of an AV product's job is to prevent > > > exploitation of a security hole in a product before the vendor > > > (assuming the vendor admits it's bug and not a misuse of the > > > product's features). > > > > just to get things clear; > > you're not talking about preventing the actual exploitation per se > > (that would be the job of the various protection technologies) or > > the containment (that would be SELinux), but more about detecting > > the presence and preventing to (accidental) use of pre-canned, > > widely used exploit binaries/files ? > > I apologize for the late reply. The answer to your question is: yes. > I was planning to write some more on this subject but this is > unnecessary now, because I see [almost] everyone accepted that some > kind of antimalware scanning is needed and are looking for > alternative (better) solutions to the patch that started all this.
we do still appreciate your description, since I don't think there's a clear "here's what we really try to protect against" statement yet.
Answering Ted's questions would be a really good start...
-- If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |