Re: anybody else also infected

[Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>]

On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 03:31:22PM +0000, David Starks-Browning wrote:
>On Thursday 14 Feb 02, Peter Buckley writes:
>> I agree about the healthy skepticism- this was obviously a false 
>> positive from the very start, but I don't think the faq addresses this 
>> type of false positive.
>
>Addressing virus alerts in the FAQ has always been a dilemma for me.
>I do not like to give the advice "disable your antivirus software" or
>"turn off checking for C:\cygwin".  It seems to me that such action
>could be exploited.
>
>Should the FAQ say something like "do not bother the list with virus
>alerts unless you have independently verified that it is not a false
>positive"?  This would apply to all Cygwin software, package archives,
>DLLs, ...
>
>There was a special problem with Cygwin Setup because NAI/McAfee would
>hang the system when opening tar.gz archives.  Maybe this is not a
>problem anymore, and can be removed from the FAQ.  Or the advice could
>be simplified to be "update your antivirus software or replace it with
>another vendor's product".  Of course not everyone can do that, but
>that's not our problem.
>
>Thanks for your opinions.

My opinion is that common-sense practices don't belong in the FAQ.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/