On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 04:53:28AM -0700, John Rudd said: > > It has a dangerous (lack of) value for CL_SCAN_STDOPT. You're better > off not upgrading until they fix it. > > (filed as bug 631, but it's nothing new: CL_SCAN_STDOPT still doesn't > include CL_SCAN_PHISHING_DOMAINLIST; that omission can cause crashing > and hanging on certain platforms ... the clamav team already knows about > this problem, and they even enable that option as a default in clamscan, > just not in the CL_SCAN_STDOPT defined value ... my suggestion is to not > upgrade until they release a version that fixes this problem)
I see this in clamscan:
if(!opt_check(opt,"no-phishing-restrictedscan")) {
/* not scanning all domains, check only URLs with domains from .pdb */
options |= CL_SCAN_PHISHING_DOMAINLIST;
}
And this in clamd:
if(cfgopt(copt,"PhishingRestrictedScan")->enabled) {
/* we don't scan urls from all domains, just those listed in
* .pdb file. This is the safe default
*/
options |= CL_SCAN_PHISHING_DOMAINLIST;
So both appear to handle the option. I guess the problem is that it is
on by default in clamscan but off by default in clamd? What problems,
stability or otherwise, have you seen as a result of this? Why do you
recommend not upgrading? This appears to have been the same way in
0.91.1, so what does not upgrading get anyone?
Sorry, I'm just confused I guess, but without more information, it's
difficult to see what the problems are that I should be avoiding.
Thanks for any clarification,
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Gran | "When it comes to humility, I'm the |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | greatest." -- Bullwinkle Moose |
| http://www.lobefin.net/~steve | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
