RE: More along the lines of malware disinfection

> Mike Moratz-Coppins
> > Wayne S. Anderson

> > 2) Jon's point about reliability here is very key to the
> > discussion.  It is COMPLETELY irresponsible to warrant to a
> > customer that you can certify a system safe after it has been
> > infected with any manner of control-compromising code that has
> > gone undetected/untreated for a period of time.

> Do you see this as applying in a joe average home user scenario?

Absolutely it does. If you say, "I've fixed it," you've arguably agreed to 
assume liability (as one of the earlier bits of conversation brought out) for 
the further good operation. If you've missed some piece of malware that then 
goes on to capture sensitive personal data...

...not a position I'd want to be in. And most of the clients I had back when I 
was working on home systems understood that, once I explained it to them. After 
all, the name of the game is user education. If they're engaging in risky 
practices, they need both the negative feedback (the inconvenience of having 
the drive wiped) and the positive feedback (okay, here's where you probably 
picked that up, and here's ways to browse more safely) if they're going to 
learn something about using their computer more intelligently.

--
Devin L. Ganger, Exchange MVP      Email: deving@3sharp.com
3Sharp                             Phone: 425.882.1032
14700 NE 95th Suite 210             Cell: 425.239.2575
Redmond, WA  98052                   Fax: 425.558.5710
(e)Mail Insecurity: http://blogs.3sharp.com/blog/deving/