Joanna Rutkowska ," detecting file infections was a waste of time".

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by ashishtx, Sep 6, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    10,224
    Hello,

    dw, I have read your answer.

    Th way you described it, your password-protected system is either:
    - a fully audited policy based protection
    - very elaborate HIPS with password confirmation to each change

    I think this is a super-uber-mega overkill. Not really practical for anything.

    Mrk
     
  2. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    17,559
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Well, I haven´t read everything but I don´t believe that file signing is the solution. My personal solution is to use a HIPS, it´s very simple, if apps try to modify certain critical system areas, for no good reason, it´s----> Block and terminate! ;)
     
  3. Jillofthejungle

    Jillofthejungle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Posts:
    1
  4. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
  5. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,886
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
  6. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Exactly what i wrote on McAfee blog :p :D
     
  7. dw2108

    dw2108 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2006
    Posts:
    480
    You're right in that it is a form of unnecessary overkill, but the LCF handles the all of passwords so that I am not bothered with password approval. A program must prove itself correct in LCF before it can run and it must know the "dialect" of LCE as well; hence, virii and malware, especially polymorhic garbage, cannot run. LCF uses few system resources and very little RAM, but it's FUN!

    BTW, years ago at OU PRG, Chris Strachey, Dana Scot, Rob Milnor and I needed a term which described translations from a combinatory with coersced types to another. The types coersced became known as "polymorhic," and the translations as "polymorphisms" Years later, the IDIOTS at Microsoft used incorrectly the term "extension" for the term "intension" à la Montague semantics! Each one of us who worked with heuristic logics, fairness semantics, etc., and programming systems representing these notions, would have never envisioned their applications to the WWW.

    Dave
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.