Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Inactive Support Threads
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Software
Security Apps
Kaspersky
Kaspersky misses a fake crack tool
Message
<blockquote data-quote="danb" data-source="post: 1051320" data-attributes="member: 62850"><p>I think everyone would agree it is best practice to only run safe code on any machine.</p><p></p><p>If that is the case, then why not only have one classification that really matters, which is Safe / Clean, and then have another classification call Not Safe, which contains any file that does not have a Safe verdict, whether it is malicious or not?</p><p></p><p>Here is a quick analogy. If you only like green M&M’s, why bother trying to figure out how good or bad the other M&M’s are? Why not simply eat only the green M&M’s?</p><p></p><p>I understand that VS / WLC does this backwards from the industry standard, so my question is, what are the downsides to doing it this way? Maybe I am wrong about how I have always viewed safe files, and maybe we need to change to the industry standard.</p><p></p><p>On a side note, I have felt this way since 1983 when the movie War Games was released, and I was downloading games and code from BBB’s. I told myself, I am only going to download the code if I am certain it is safe.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="danb, post: 1051320, member: 62850"] I think everyone would agree it is best practice to only run safe code on any machine. If that is the case, then why not only have one classification that really matters, which is Safe / Clean, and then have another classification call Not Safe, which contains any file that does not have a Safe verdict, whether it is malicious or not? Here is a quick analogy. If you only like green M&M’s, why bother trying to figure out how good or bad the other M&M’s are? Why not simply eat only the green M&M’s? I understand that VS / WLC does this backwards from the industry standard, so my question is, what are the downsides to doing it this way? Maybe I am wrong about how I have always viewed safe files, and maybe we need to change to the industry standard. On a side note, I have felt this way since 1983 when the movie War Games was released, and I was downloading games and code from BBB’s. I told myself, I am only going to download the code if I am certain it is safe. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top