Doug Laidlaw <doug@dougshost.invalid> writes:

>Bit Twister wrote:

>> On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 00:12:39 +1100, Doug Laidlaw wrote:
>>> I receive occasional emails from unknown females (probably script
>>> kiddies) whose body (the emails, not the women) is a line of hex numbers
>>> or similar. A virus scan in Windows disclosed no risk, but they can't be
>>> innocent.
>>
>> With about 10 new pieces of malware a minuted why would you think a
>> scan is safe. http://www.darkreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=143424
>> Not to mention how long your AV sofware takes to get around to
>> detecting what is being mailed.
>> http://www.commtouch.com/Site/Resear...t_activity.asp
>>
>> Guessing obfuscated javascript or url based on all the provided
>> information.

>Naturally, I didn't want to post the signature to the group.

>As for the 10 pieces of malware a minute:

>(a) this one is now months old;

>(b) A friend was unlucky enough to lose his whole system to a virus that got
>him before Norton had updated to detect it. He blamed Norton and left them
>over it, saying it was their job to have it in their database. I suggested
>that more probably, he was just unlucky, although Norton has copped some
>bad publicity in the past. I run CA, sold in Aus as Vet.

Why he would blame NOrton rather than Microsoft has always bewildered me.
The wheels fall off of your car regularly because the carmaker uses bad
steel, and you blame the road builders for not filling in the holes fast
enough.