On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 at 11:47:59 +0300, George Chelidze wrote:
> Tomasz Kojm wrote:
> >
> >The way libclamav works in the case of executable files is:
> >
> >1. check the file against the signature database and stop scanning if
> >virus is found
> >
> >2. run PE parser (report broken executables; try to guess and unpack
> >compressed files)
> 
> One additional question here:
> 
> I get several messages a day which are marked as broken executables by 
> clamav but as I-Worm.NetSky.o by kav. AFAIK it's an alias to 
> Worm.SomeFool.N. Why clam doesn't detect known signature and falls to 
> step 2? (Maybe a part of signature is missing because a file it's 
> broken?) 

I believe so. To be sure, the samples would have to be examined.

> I don't think clamav and kav use signatures which differs a 
> lot, do they?

They surely differ.

-- 
 Tomasz Papszun   SysAdm @ TP S.A. Lodz, Poland  | And it's only
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lodz.tpsa.pl/iso/ | ones and zeros.
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.ClamAV.net/   A GPL virus scanner
_______________________________________________
http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users

Reply via email to