On Thursday 07 August 2008, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
quoted text
> On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 03:49:55 +0300
>
> Mihai Donțu <mdontu@bitdefender.com> wrote:
> > Well, here is one attempt.
> >
> > A good percentage of an AV product's job is to prevent exploitation
> > of a security hole in a product before the vendor (assuming the
> > vendor admits it's bug and not a misuse of the product's features).
>
> just to get things clear;
> you're not talking about preventing the actual exploitation per se
> (that would be the job of the various protection technologies) or the
> containment (that would be SELinux), but more about detecting the
> presence and preventing to (accidental) use of pre-canned, widely used
> exploit binaries/files ?

I apologize for the late reply. The answer to your question is: yes. I was 
planning to write some more on this subject but this is unnecessary now, 
because I see [almost] everyone accepted that some kind of antimalware 
scanning is needed and are looking for alternative (better) solutions to the 
patch that started all this.

Can't wait to see the end result. :)

Thanks,

-- 
Mihai Donțu
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/