Given that the PhishTank signatures, specifically, have been causing the performance issues, no. It's not unreasonable to want to pull them, and only them, out. Having them in a separate db file would be highly beneficial to those of us that don't want or need them at all. Barring that, having a configuration option to disable them that is separate from heuristics and safebrowsing would be just as effective.
--Maarten On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 10:43 AM Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uh...@fantomas.sk> wrote: > On 05.04.19 22:05, Tim Hawkins wrote: > >Does clamav partition the database so that signatures that are mainly > associated with email scanning can be dropped out for folks only needing > filesystems scans, none of our systems use email, and we dont make use of > the mailer extension. > > how do you imagine e-mails are scanned, when not as files? > it's not usually efficient to pass them to clamav through a socket, it's > better to store them locally and pass a file descriptor... > > >Having to load all the email focused signatures could as you have > observed impact performance. > > I doubt so. > > > -- > Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ > Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. > Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. > On the other hand, you have different fingers. > > _______________________________________________ > > clamav-users mailing list > clamav-users@lists.clamav.net > https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users > > > Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: > https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq > > http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml >
_______________________________________________ clamav-users mailing list clamav-users@lists.clamav.net https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
