Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!rutgers!netnews.upenn.edu!vax1.cc.lehigh.edu!sei.cmu.edu!krvw
From: dmg@retina.mitre.org (David Gursky)
Newsgroups: comp.virus
Subject: Re: Swap Virus Name (PC)
Message-ID: <0004.8908241743.AA12387@ge.sei.cmu.edu>
Date: 24 Aug 89 14:06:12 GMT
Sender: Virus Discussion List <VIRUS-L@IBM1.CC.Lehigh.EDU>
Lines: 7
Approved: krvw@sei.cmu.edu

In deference/support to Y. Radai, while it is important to try and be consisten
t
about the naming convention we use for viruses and so forth, it is not "life-
threatening".  As the "Swap" virus does not fit into the current naming
convention well, and "Swap" is not a "libelous" name (as opposed to calling it
the "Jim and Tammy Bakker" virus for example), then why *shouldn't* we call it
the "Swap" virus.