Re: TrendMicro goes Douchebag

[security curmudgeon <jericho () attrition org>]

On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Paul Ferguson wrote:

: The '600 patent, as I understand it, is unique in that it qualifies the 
: AV mitigation as being done by a gateway device (a la what we now call 
: an "appliance", a la "proxy server") and not by a software solution (AV) 
: atop another application (an SMTP server, in this instance).

Which is why so many of us are a bit outspoken on this topic.

If prior art had anti-virus software scanning incoming mail for viruses 
before passing to the client, but only did so on the SMTP server.. and 
the TM patent covers an additional device (proxy / appliance / whatever), 
then that is hardly patent-worthy in many people's opinion.

Given the track record of the USPO issuing patents to companies that 
clearly did not come up with the new technology (specifically regarding 
computer security tech) and are essentially using it to fraudently extort 
companies into licensing fees, it rubs many security practitioners the 
wrong way.

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.