crumrig @
us-state .
gov wrote:
>
>
> the desktop as well, as this is w
> here a lot of these things start out life. Besides, I think cleaning up a virus at the wall as something comes in is a ton easier than having
to clean up 4 thousand machines, don't you? I guess what I would like
to say is that a case can be made for both.
If you show me aproduct that would do heuristic scanning ( the only way
to catch polymorphics ) without considerable overhead, I'll kiss your
butt. :))
>
> ---------------Original Message---------------
> On Thu, 27 Feb 1997, Pavel Galynin wrote:
>
> > --------------------------- cut ----------------------------------------
> > > > I don't think the virus filters come close to being worth the cost.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Every organization I have worked with found that the best way to handle
> > > the issue of viri is at the desktop workstation.
> > >
> > It is the most efficient way, efficience/cost ratiowise, but it is not
> > perfect and leaves HUGE scurity holes.
>
> Agreed it's not perfect, but is at this time the most viable solution
> available. Sure, one can scan at the wall/gateway, but, that's more
> imperfect a solution at this point in time, not to mention the possible
> bottlenecking that can most likely ensue. But as for this leaving "HUGE
> scurity holes", I'd certainly like to see you clarify that statement a tad
> <smile>...
>
> Later,
>
> Ron DuFresne
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> "Cutting the space budget really restores my faith in humanity. It
> eliminates dreams, goals, and ideals and lets us get straight to the
> business of hate, debauchery, and self-annihilation." -- Johnny Hart
> ***testing, only testing, and damn good at it too!***
>
> OK, so you're a Ph.D. Just don't touch anything.
>
> ----------End of Original Message----------
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
