Hi,

>> The MBL_144360 is still present in the mbl database, but now it
>> doesn't match.
>
> That signature has a big google footprint. I found it here, for example:
>
> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.security.virus.clamav.sanesecurity/3094
>
> It would seem there is a QA problem and that perhaps the creator is
> modifying existing signatures rather than replacing them. This is bad
> practice in my opinion. Signature identifiers should be unique. If a
> signature is modified it should get a new identifier.
>
> I quit using those sigs quite some time ago.

Interesting, thanks so much. I've noticed it catches quite a bit here.
I assumed they were safe. Is the general consensus that they are more
aggressive or experimental than should be acceptable on a production
box?

Thanks again,
Alex
_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://www.clamav.net/support/ml

Reply via email to