Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | RE: Consumer Reports AV and their 5,500 new variants |
|---|---|
| Date: | Wed, 6 Sep 2006 01:01:39 -0700 |
No noise makes life more complicated for me, when the boss thinks what CR did is a great idea, and maybe we should do that too. I bet that CR article complicated life for many others working in companies with security products. "Rosenthal Virus Simulator" - That sensitive topic came up when I asked about testing our product against malware. The point that many well-known experts on this board made was that an accredited (trusted) lab perform the tests, and that creating malware was always bad, even for testing. To quote from a letter signed by many on this list (http://cybersoft.com/whitepapers/papers/open_letter.shtml) "Most antivirus companies are under some form of self-imposed restrictions that prevent them from knowingly creating new viruses or virus variants. In addition, competent testing and certification bodies such as ICSA, Virus Bulletin, Secure Computing, and AV-Test.org, do not create new viruses or virus variants for testing. Indeed, the consensus throughout the antivirus development and testing community is that creating a new virus or variant for product testing would be very bad - and totally unnecessary. To do so would undoubtedly raise questions about their ethics." Maybe opinions have changed on creating viruses in a closed test lab, and it's no longer unethical. Bill Stout p.s. - The letter quoted was signed by: Joe Wells - Francesca Thorneloe - Pavel Baudis - Kenneth L. Bechtel - Dr. Vesselin Vladimirov Bontchev - Shane Coursen - Joost De Raeymaeker - Allan Dyer - Nick FitzGerald - David Harley - Dr. Jan Hruska - Jose Martinez - Andreas Marx - Petr Odehnal - David Phillips - Peter V. Radatti - Stuart Taylor - Robert Vibert - Eddy Willems - Righard J. Zwienenberg - -----Original Message----- From: Kurt Seifried [mailto:bt@seifried.org] Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 10:24 PM To: Bill Stout; focus-virus@securityfocus.com Cc: rubin@jhu.edu Subject: Re: Consumer Reports AV and their 5,500 new variants Who cares if they aren't released. I'm willing to best the testing firm/CR is competent enough to do this on a closed network. I haven't heard anything about these actually being relased, if a tree falls int he forest, but the forest is fenced off and no-one hears it who cares. Maybe that's why there is no noise. -Kurt ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- ALERT: "How a Hacker Launches a SQL Injection Attack!" - White Paper It's as simple as placing additional SQL commands into a Web Form input box giving hackers complete access to all your backend systems! https://download.spidynamics.com/1/ad/sql.asp?Campaign_ID=70160000000CZW l ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ALERT: "How a Hacker Launches a SQL Injection Attack!" - White Paper It's as simple as placing additional SQL commands into a Web Form input box giving hackers complete access to all your backend systems! https://download.spidynamics.com/1/ad/sql.asp?Campaign_ID=70160000000CZWl ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Consumer Reports AV and their 5,500 new variants, Kurt Seifried |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: Consumer Reports AV and their 5,500 new variants, Paul Schmehl |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Consumer Reports AV and their 5,500 new variants, Kurt Seifried |
| Next by Thread: | RE: Consumer Reports AV and their 5,500 new variants, Paul Schmehl |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |