Frederic Bonroy said:
FromTheRafters a écrit :
Of course.
It's better, but not much, because people tend to misinterpret "no
viruses were found" as "there are no viruses".
Yes, but it at least doesn't seem to specifically imply this.
Not too much one can do about what users infer. Maybe
a simple "Scanned by AVG" and a URL would have been
enough to satisfy the marketing department ~ users can
then infer all of the warm fuzzies they desire.
Of course an anti-virus
program eventually needs to tell the user about the result of the scan.
But note: I am talking *specifically* about the signature attached to
emails, NOT about a normal routine scan.
So am I, I was just pointing out that the idea is not foriegn to the
developers ~ witness, the alert wordings.
Maybe that's why we seem to
disagree; I believe we don't.
No, we are in agreement here.
....and yes, the complete absence of the sig would be desireable
except for those that wish confirmation that AVG actually does
something (i.e. that the sig is an indication that the AV is working).
I can't think of any foolproof signature right now. Perhaps something
like this:
I'm not striving for foolproof, just something a little less dishonest.
"This message was scanned by XYZ. Its virus definitions may have been
out of date and even if they weren't, it's still not impossible that
a virus slipped through. Do not fully trust the result of this scan and
take precautions to avoid a virus infection."
....but let's not go overboard.
Not only is this signature totally meaningless and unhelpful, it's also
ugly. But at least it's not misleading as AVG's standard certification.
Agreed.