Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!pacbell.com!iggy.GW.Vitalink.COM!widener!netnews.upenn.edu!vax1.cc.lehigh.edu!cert.sei.cmu.edu!krvw
From: p1@arkham.wimsey.bc.ca (Rob Slade)
Newsgroups: comp.virus
Subject: Norton's Antiviral program Question (PC)
Message-ID: <0004.9104181344.AA09450@ubu.cert.sei.cmu.edu>
Date: 17 Apr 91 05:24:54 GMT
Sender: Virus Discussion List <VIRUS-L@LEHIIBM1>
Lines: 17
Approved: krvw@sei.cmu.edu

axtlp@acad2.alaska.edu (PIKEY TAM L) writes:

> I have heard there was an article in a mag. comparing Norton's
> antiviral to McAfee's scan and that the Norton's program failed to
> identify the Stoned virus.  Can anyone confirm or deny this?

In my testing of the Norton Antivirus program (see the reviews in the
cert and MIBSRV archives) it identified 3 versions of the Stoned
virus.  I do not have copies of the "Stoned II/Donald Duck" versions,
so I can't vouch for that.

=============
Vancouver          p1@arkham.wimsey.bc.ca   | "Don't buy a
Institute for      Robert_Slade@mtsg.sfu.ca |     computer."
Research into      (SUZY) INtegrity         | Richards' First
User               Canada V7K 2G6           | Law of Data
Security                                    | Security