On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 17:37:11 EDT, Mohit Muthanna said: > > You really expect us to believe that the M$ AV team won't leverage off the > > fact that they could know about that API, and all the others in Windows? > > in addition, given that they have the sources to their own OS, i doubt > they really have to do much manual reversing... i'm sure the debugging > tools they have developed over the years would quite easily aid them > in determining precisely what the viruses do and how they do it. No... you're still not getting it. There's no reverse engineering involved. ;) Let's pop over to http://www.eeye.com/html/research/upcoming/index.html Hey look.. http://www.eeye.com/html/research/upcoming/20031007.html is 194 days overdue.. Now, your AV software doesn't have to have *ANY* reverse engineering for the virus if the operating system and/or AV updates is whispering in its ear "Anything that does *this* is malware exploiting 20031007". And at that point, there's no reason to actually ship a *patch*, you just ship a data file that tells *your* AV that "20031007 exploits look like this" - at which point you can presumably trap 100% of exploits, and the competition has to reverse engineer each one... ;) "Systems protected with M$ AV were 100% safe, while 30% of Brand X users got whacked while their teams were busy reverse engineering"... Hard to argue with THAT sales pitch.. ;)
Attachment:
pgp00042.pgp
Description: PGP signature