Alan_J_Roberts@Sun.COM (08/15/89)
In yesterday's Virus-L, Jim Wright stated: >(Posting VIRUSCAN to comp.binaries)... is not a good idea. Since it is >frequently updated it would be long out of date by the time it got through >c.b.i.p. I'd like to point out that, while ViruScan is indeed updated as soon as a new virus is discovered, even the first version of ViruScan is still statistically current. We need to differentiate between the NUMBER of viruse out there and the statistical PROBABILITY of infection from any given virus. Viruses are not created on one day and the next become major infection problems. It take many months, and in some cases - years, before a given virus becomes a statistically valid threat to the average computer user. A case in point is the Jerusalem virus. It's nearly 2 years old and was first reported in the States (other than by a researcher) in February of 1988. In August of '88 the reported infection rate was 3 infections per week. In July of '89, the rate was over 30 reports per day. Today the Jerusalem virus is a valid threat. Another more current case is the Icelandic virus. It's over 2 months old and we've had no reported infections in the U.S. Given even the limited information we have about virus epidemiology, any product that can identify 99% of the infection ocurrences today, will be able to identify close to the same percentage 5 to 6 months from now, irrespective of the number of new viruses created in the interim. For those that insist on the 100% figure, I suggest you bite the bullet and download the current version of ViruScan from HomeBase every month. P.S. Some people have suggested that the CVIA statistics are inaccurate or incomplete. The numbers come from a reporting network composed of member companies. These companies include such multinationals as Fujitsu, Phillips N.A., Amdahl, Arthur Anderson and Co., the Japan Trade Center, Weyerhauser, Amex Assurance and others whose combined PC base, either internal or through client responsibility, totals over 2 million computers. It is highly unlikely that a major virus problem could exist and not be reported by one or another of these agencies.