Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="509322" data-source="post: 774655">BD is detecting malicious scripts via signatures. Therefore, they have to &quot;collect it all to know it all&quot; so they can create the signatures. Well, collecting it all to know it all is an impossible task. It is just like Microsoft asking researchers to report identified malicious scripts so they can protect against each one via AMSI and ASR. At that rate it will take the next 10 years to identify stuff at the tip of the iceberg. We&#039;re already over a decade into PoSh and, to be honest, even though Microsoft is decent at identifying malicious PoSh scripts - that is only because of a handful of PoSh researchers who have reported the malicious scripts and ways to bypass PoSh that they discovered over many years. :X3:I don&#039;t know about anyone else, but that just defies any common sense.If people think that is sufficient, then there is a very weird sense of what is appropriate, adequate and what constitutes trust.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="509322, post: 774655"] BD is detecting malicious scripts via signatures. Therefore, they have to "collect it all to know it all" so they can create the signatures. Well, collecting it all to know it all is an impossible task. It is just like Microsoft asking researchers to report identified malicious scripts so they can protect against each one via AMSI and ASR. At that rate it will take the next 10 years to identify stuff at the tip of the iceberg. We're already over a decade into PoSh and, to be honest, even though Microsoft is decent at identifying malicious PoSh scripts - that is only because of a handful of PoSh researchers who have reported the malicious scripts and ways to bypass PoSh that they discovered over many years. :X3: I don't know about anyone else, but that just defies any common sense. If people think that is sufficient, then there is a very weird sense of what is appropriate, adequate and what constitutes trust. [/QUOTE]

Verification