🚀 go-pugleaf

>BTW, one tip. The detection rate of Virstop is exactly the same as of
>F-Prot in Quickscan mode - they are using the same mechanism. Maybe
>I'll do tests on our virus collection with F-Prot /quick one of these
>days...

Well, VIRSTOP (or Quick scan) will not detect as many viruses as
F-PROT Secure scan.  It will miss all MtE viruses for example, and
most of the viruses which cannot be found using a signature-based
approach. While Secure scan will detect around 99% of all viruses,
Quick scan may detect only around 90% (however, it will detect a much
higher percentage of "in-the-wild" viruses).

>> Virstop seems awfully small to have all
>> those signatures inside itself, 

Well, 12K isn't exactly small....and of that only 2K is code, the rest
is the signatures.  Of course, by using the /DISK command-line switch
you can get VIRSTOP's memory usage down to 2K, as the cost of a small
delay when running any program.

- -frisk