Re: TrendMicro goes...

[Colin Keigher <colin () afreak ca>]

I got a better idea...

I would like to patent a system where it passes through three devices:

The first device would scan for viruses.
The second device would scan for anything that is not considered a virus
but may as well be one.
The third device would filter out silly Internet arguments.

To ensure the uniqueness of the device, I would probably add a fourth
pass that would provide "user education" to the person who sent the
e-mail. This "education" would come in the form of a clue-by-four, a
meeting with the board of education, or a swing of the clue bat.

- Colin

security curmudgeon wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Paul Ferguson wrote:
>
> : It bears repeating that this is not about prior art in AV scanning, but 
> : rather, doing so on a gateway device (e.g. appliance) which Trend Micro 
> : was the first to do -- hence the patent.
>
> Likewise, bears repeating: 
>
>   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.
>
>
> If you disagree, then I should patent a system where the mail is passed to 
> *two* devices before the SMTP server, one which scans for MALWARE since 
> the patent only says 'virus', and the other that scans for viruses. Such a 
> patent can be worded the same as the TM patent, just s/virus/malware and 
> it should be just as valid. Right?
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
>   

_______________________________________________
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.