Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Azure" data-source="post: 558351" data-attributes="member: 29489"><a href="http://www.securityweek.com/virustotal-policy-change-rocks-anti-malware-industry" target="_blank">VirusTotal Policy Change Rocks Anti-Malware Industry | SecurityWeek.Com</a>&quot;On May 4, <a href="https://www.virustotal.com/" target="_blank">VirusTotal</a> (VT) dropped a bombshell that has reverberated throughout the anti-malware industry. That bombshell was a two-sentence change to VT&#039;s policies: &quot;all scanning companies will now be required to integrate their detection scanner in the public VT interface, in order to be eligible to receive antivirus results as part of their VirusTotal API services.&quot; A second amendment requires new applicants to effectively be certified by the Anti-Malware Testing Standards Organization (<a href="http://www.amtso.org/" target="_blank">AMTSO</a>).&quot;&quot;<a href="http://www.securityweek.com/google-acquires-virustotal" target="_blank">Owned by Google,</a> VirusTotal is an online service that checks suspicious files against an array of anti-malware products. Since the check is static, it relies heavily on the signature engines of the subscribing vendors. In its own words, it is &quot;a collaborative service to promote the exchange of information and strengthen security on the internet.&quot; If a submitted file is found to be malicious, details are circulated to all subscribing companies – and in this sense it is an early and effective threat sharing mechanism.It&#039;s give-and-take system. Basically &quot;You&quot; use our data but you have you share yours with VirusTotal(and other participating security companies). And since SecureAPlus doesn&#039;t have its own engine, it doesn&#039;t have anything to share.I&#039;m actually surprised it took VirusTotal this long to enforce the new policy. It&#039;s unfortunate for SecureAPlus users, however like mentioned above, in the link provided by [USER=34869]@truestampede[/USER], users are still protected by the application whitelisting and Universal AV.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Azure, post: 558351, member: 29489"] [URL="http://www.securityweek.com/virustotal-policy-change-rocks-anti-malware-industry"]VirusTotal Policy Change Rocks Anti-Malware Industry | SecurityWeek.Com[/URL] "On May 4, [URL='https://www.virustotal.com/']VirusTotal[/URL] (VT) dropped a bombshell that has reverberated throughout the anti-malware industry. That bombshell was a two-sentence change to VT's policies: [B]"all scanning companies will now be required to integrate their detection scanner in the public VT interface,[/B] in order to be eligible to receive antivirus results as part of their VirusTotal API services." A second amendment requires new applicants to effectively be certified by the Anti-Malware Testing Standards Organization ([URL='http://www.amtso.org/']AMTSO[/URL])." "[URL='http://www.securityweek.com/google-acquires-virustotal']Owned by Google,[/URL] VirusTotal is an online service that checks suspicious files against an array of anti-malware products. Since the check is static, it relies heavily on the signature engines of the subscribing vendors. [B]In its own words, it is "a collaborative service to promote the exchange of information and strengthen security on the internet." If a submitted file is found to be malicious, details are circulated to all subscribing companies [/B]– and in this sense it is an early and effective threat sharing mechanism. It's give-and-take system. Basically "You" use our data but you have you share yours with VirusTotal(and other participating security companies). And since SecureAPlus doesn't have its own engine, it doesn't have anything to share. I'm actually surprised it took VirusTotal this long to enforce the new policy. It's unfortunate for SecureAPlus users, however like mentioned above, in the link provided by [USER=34869]@truestampede[/USER], users are still protected by the application whitelisting and Universal AV. [/QUOTE]

Verification