Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Trog wrote:
> > I'm not trying to "scare you away", I really don't care what you do.
> >
> > I've told you how you can easily do what you want, using ClamAV.
>
> As Trog has already mentioned, you can simply remove the phishing
> signatures from the database. This is not trying to scare you away. It
> is a simple workaround to your specific needs at this moment.
>
> Or, as Tomasz and I have both mentioned, you can easily bypass this in
> your filtering software.
>
> This discussion is not a vendetta against the idea, but everyone is
> entitled to their own opinion, so it is of no use getting touchy when
> someone offers alternative advice, or a personal opinion.
Pardon me, Trog offered me two options, of which "user another product"
was the first. If that isn't scaring me away for you, then I don't know
what is.
I just explained why Thomasz' suggesting is suboptimal in another message
of mine.
I might be able to remove the signatures I don't want, but I would still
have to know if there is "an authoritative hierarchy of signature names
from which I can see what hierarchy branches ('HTML.Phishing.*', etc.)" I
would have to remove. Is there one?
But I think this is overly complicated. Maybe it would be better for the
official ClamAV signature databases to be modular, i.e. have one for
technical attacks and one for social engineering attacks. That way people
who only use one of them wouldn't have to download both.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users
