Re: [malware-list] [RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to alinuxinterfaceforon access scanning

["Rob Meijer" <capibara@xs4all.nl>]

On Sun, August 17, 2008 10:58, david@lang.hm wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2008, Peter Dolding wrote:
>> Instead swap across to the shorter white list to process and sort.
>> Quarantining for black list scanning so performance of machine is hit
>> with the least ammount.  Some areas like email, p2p for people using
>> formats that should not contain macros or executable code white list
>> scanning there is all that is needed before either blocking or asking
>> user if black list scanning should be preformed or the file just
>> deleted.  Lets close the door's on these malware writers without hurt
>> end users any more than we have to.  What is the point of running a full
>> black list across a file the user will delete because it was not what
>> they thought it was.
>
> you are arguing with the wrong people here. we are not trying to define
> the future of anti-virus technologies, we are trying to figure out how to
> provide the hooks so that people and companies can go off and do the
> research and experimentation and try different approaches.

Given recent demonstrations that show how easy it apparently is to bypass
blacklist base approaches, providing hooks to allow these blacklist
approaches may I feel be rather futile. Focusing only on hooks for white
list approaches in combination with hooks for least authority approaches
like the powerbox would IMHO seem like a much more reasonable approach
given the current state of things and knowledge concerning the blacklist
technologies. Explicitly adding support for technology that is quickly
becoming obsolete would seem like a waste of time and resources.


Rob