Current antivirus solutions can detect Flame, Duqu, Stuxnet, et al, they just need to know about them and/or what they do. That's the problem with blacklisting.
It's probably more helpful to think of these classes of malware as being "obscure" or "wide-spread" than "smart" or "stupid" (I apologize for my previous analogy.) "Advanced persistent threats" don't really exist on a higher plane than common, boring malware (although these have included some impressive payloads), they're just tailored toward something specific in most cases.
I think it's a logical impossibility that all malware should suddenly become as obscure as these were. The payload can certainly be shuffled around, but nothing stops AV from recognizing and stopping whatever mechanism decrypts and runs them. That doesn't, in any way, make AV a panacea--but that's the way it's always been.
Woah, thank for the explanation. You're right, and that makes sense. However I'm of the "anything is possible" mindset, so I do still have to wonder if signature matching is nearing its end. Though I admit, given what you've just clarified, it seems unlikely.
It's probably more helpful to think of these classes of malware as being "obscure" or "wide-spread" than "smart" or "stupid" (I apologize for my previous analogy.) "Advanced persistent threats" don't really exist on a higher plane than common, boring malware (although these have included some impressive payloads), they're just tailored toward something specific in most cases.
I think it's a logical impossibility that all malware should suddenly become as obscure as these were. The payload can certainly be shuffled around, but nothing stops AV from recognizing and stopping whatever mechanism decrypts and runs them. That doesn't, in any way, make AV a panacea--but that's the way it's always been.