I fundamentally disagree with AV software purely on the Black Listing rule.
I believe a single application that infact WHITE LISTED trusted applications to run, and GREY LIST the unknown if you aren't 100% sure (competent computer users only [approx 0.0001% of total users!]) Those that you DO NOT want to run AT ALL can them be BLACK LISTED.
Why oh why are white listed applications not built in to AV software??? Instead they INSIST on scanning every f*ckin file against a list of hundreds of thousands of definitions JUST IN CASE it's the old MSBLASTER virus coming back...pah...education on how to use a computer correctly and don't use KeyGens/Limewiere is better than spending £35 on Norton to wipe 25% of your computer's performance off!

Norton is a piece of pish. McAfee is not much better. I advise everyone to go with one of the free AV's, at least they don't cost you money, and they are more reliable.

The Professor should approach a Venture Capitalist firm for funding and business management help. He's probably got a great idea that needs patenting, and a young trained work force in his students. They could all be shareholders, work hard and end up rich and fat from this!

"Zulfikar Ramzan, the technical director of Symantec's security team said that all the students were doing was writing code that had not appeared on any blacklists."

And in one succinct statement Ramzan points out the fundamental flaw in all blacklist AV programs -- the blacklist. Jackass.

10/10 for sheer sarkiness. :)

Closed-source security software is a market for lemons.

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/04/a_security_mark.html