Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!ginosko!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!rutgers!att!cbnewsl!mgh1
From: mgh1@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (matthew.g.hetman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: VirusX 3.2, VirusX 3.1
Keywords: virusx,amiga
Message-ID: <2233@cbnewsl.ATT.COM>
Date: 12 Oct 89 13:06:10 GMT
References: <1389@ultb.UUCP> <1940@sactoh0.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 19

In article <1940@sactoh0.UUCP>, hrlaser@sactoh0.UUCP (Harv R. Laser) writes:
> 
> Just stick with 3.2 and if you see a 3.3 float by you, let it
> keep right on floating 'cuz it's not a legitimate Steve Tibbett
> release.  The next version is in the works right now but no
> version number will be mentioned ahead of time in order to
> try to avoid some nasty person from releasing a bogus version
> prematurely, which is what 3.3 is. 
> 

I agree with the comment stick with 3.2 but you must also use 3.1 to
be sure you DO NOT have the SCA virus. The 3.2 will not properly detect
the SCA virus even though it list the SCA virus as one of the viruses
it can find. VirusX3.2 has the advantage of detecting more viruses then
3.1 but can not be relied upon to detect SCA. I have tried several
sources for obtaining my version of 3.2, in case I had a tampered version
and all did not find the SCA virus.

				Matt Hetman