logoalt Hacker News

acousticsyesterday at 4:27 PM2 repliesview on HN

How is any kind of antivirus or threat detection software supposed to operate on this standard?

Libel suits can be financially catastrophic, so even a tiny false positive rate could present risk that disincentivizes producing such software at all.

And a threat detection mechanism that has a 0.0% false positive rate is conservative to the point of being nearly useless.


Replies

rtsamyesterday at 4:33 PM

I think that is the idea. They shouldn't exist without a prompt mitigation path.

In other words, if you can't deal with the false positives in a timely manner. You SHOULD be liable for the damages.

I can't build a budget car put together in an unsafe manner. Then complain I can't compete due to all the peoples cars crashing and blowing up and suing me.

kevin_thibedeauyesterday at 4:46 PM

You document your claims with concrete evidence of fraud. That will be your libel defense. No evidence means you bear the full responsibility of a fuckup.

show 1 reply