On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 14:39:47 -0700 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Damian wrote:
> > So, if you didn't do it, and none of the other team-members did it,
> > then who did? This raises an interesting issue: if an attacker
> > figures out how to poison the DNS server, nobody would
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Damian wrote:
So, if you didn't do it, and none of the other team-members did it,
then who did? This raises an interesting issue: if an attacker
figures out how to poison the DNS server, nobody would get updates.
Worse, an attacker could point the
Damian wrote:
> So, if you didn't do it, and none of the other team-members did it,
> then who did? This raises an interesting issue: if an attacker
> figures out how to poison the DNS server, nobody would get updates.
Worse, an attacker could point the records to a server under their own contro
Hello Damian Menscher,
> >my only explanation is that one of the slave servers hasn't received any
> >update during the last 2 days for the cvd.clamav.net zone. I'll start
> >investigating.
>
> If that were the case, wouldn't we have seen warnings that the timestamp
> was outdated (it has to b
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005, Luca Gibelli wrote:
Hello Damian Menscher,
(BTW, this was reported in #clamav, here, and I saw it in my own logs.
So it wasn't just a fluke of someone's local DNS server getting confused
and giving the wrong info. Also, the fact that the timestamp was
correct indicates thi
Hello Damian Menscher,
> So, if you didn't do it, and none of the other team-members did it, then
> who did? This raises an interesting issue: if an attacker figures out
> how to poison the DNS server, nobody would get updates. As unlikely as
> that seems, it makes me wonder if we should con
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 15:14:02 -0500 (CDT) in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Damian
Menscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some timestamps (in GMT) for the record:
>
> I saw the problem at 05:37:01, but not at 05:52:00. Bill saw it at
> 05:52:07. And lizdeika on IRC reported it at 06:10, though
> presumab
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005, Luca Gibelli wrote:
Hello Damian Menscher,
WARNING: Your ClamAV installation is OUTDATED!
WARNING: Local version: 0.86 Recommended version: 0.85.1
Any ideas what's going on?
Don't worry about it... apparently the human updating the DNS record
just goofed, but it looks lik
Hello Damian Menscher,
> >WARNING: Your ClamAV installation is OUTDATED!
> >WARNING: Local version: 0.86 Recommended version: 0.85.1
> >Any ideas what's going on?
>
> Don't worry about it... apparently the human updating the DNS record
That's me :)
> just goofed, but it looks like it's alread
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005, Bill Landry wrote:
This seems rather odd, since I updated to 0.86 when it was announced two days
ago, but with the latest update I am now seeing this:
WARNING: Your ClamAV installation is OUTDATED!
WARNING: Local version: 0.86 Recommended version: 0.85.1
Any ideas what's
This seems rather odd, since I updated to 0.86 when it was announced two
days ago, but with the latest update I am now seeing this:
--
ClamAV update process started at Wed Jun 22 22:52:09 2005
WARNING: Your ClamAV installation is OUTDATED!
WARNING: Local versio
11 matches
Mail list logo
