Contrary to the comments on the article, I think this is good. It reflects on a broader use of good coding practices, and other software engineering practices.
Once malcode writers get into process, the arms race between them and the "anti-virus" companies will come back into more balance. The "AV" companies have probably always been saddled with "process", now the malcode writers appear to be making that same, dunderheaded, mistake.
Comments
Contrary to the comments on the article, I think this is good. It reflects on a broader use of good coding practices, and other software engineering practices.
Once malcode writers get into process, the arms race between them and the "anti-virus" companies will come back into more balance. The "AV" companies have probably always been saddled with "process", now the malcode writers appear to be making that same, dunderheaded, mistake.