Re: [Clamav-users] (no subject)
Jerry wrote: What has become conspicuously apparent is that if those who are doing the most complaining had spend even one percent of that time keeping their systems up-to-date and keeping themselves abreast of current development and deployment strategies with the software they employ, this whole discussion would be academic. In the interest of eliminating any further waste of my time or computer resources, I am now instigating a kill filter on this thread. +1 -- Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon? ___ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
Re: [Clamav-users] EOL
lists wrote: Anything else I can help you with? Don't let the door hit you on the way out. -- Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon? ___ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
Re: [Clamav-users] ClamAV engine v0.95.2
Gianluigi Tiesi wrote: On 05/08/2009 11.48, sergio Fernandez wrote: Hi When will ClamAV engine v0.95.2 be used? Regards For what? did I miss something? Judging by his MUA (Apple Mail) he asks for a updated OS X version. Sergio: http://osx.topicdesk.com/content/view/62/41/ might help you. Best regards, Nico -- Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon? ___ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
Re: [Clamav-users] ClamAV Vulnerability
David F. Skoll wrote: Tomasz Kojm wrote: This is getting boring! I'm sorry you find it so. I actually find this to be exciting reading: http://www.securityfocus.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi?o=0l=30c=12op=display_listvendor=Clam%20Anti-Virusversion=title=CVE= Oh, then I'm sure you will find this an interesting reading too: http://search.securityfocus.com/swsearch?sbm=%2Fmetaname=alldocquery=roaring+penguin+software+vulnerabil%2Ax=0y=0 Best regards Nico -- Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon? ___ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
Re: [Clamav-users] Cherishing my ignorance - An appeal to package rs
Jim Redman wrote: I have to say, of all the lists I subscribe to, the vocal members of this list are the most arrogant and insulting. However, I consider comments such as Luca Gibelli's, bandwidth wasting, We are happy to suffer this loss. and Dennis Peterson's His specific problem is he lacks the skill to install and manage the product reflect more about the person making the comment, rather than the target. I really hope this thread dies a quick death. If you consider L.Gibelli's and D.Petterson's replys a bandwidth wasting, what are you calling your repetitive mindless blather like I'm not spending another two days monkeying with configuration? None of the comparably few and well documented options in ClamAv's config files should be hard to understand for someone who is allegedly administrating Linux servers since late 1.x release, not to mention a software developer like you also alleged to be. As for your comparison with a doorknob, if a doorknob has the better arguments it's reasonable that you don't want to debate with it. I'm sorry for the probably arrogant and insulting tone but you're literally asking for it. -- Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon? ___ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
Re: [Clamav-users] LibclamAV - Very Slow
My application is called every time, a mail arrives. ...And every time you load the signature databases, I guess... What he probably means is that you should use ClamD/ClamDScan instead of ClamScan. Sorry, I brain-farted. What I probably meant is that you should use ClamD if possible and connect directly to it instead of using libclamav. Best regards, Nico -- +--+ Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon? ___ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
Re: [Clamav-users] LibclamAV - Very Slow
My application is called every time, a mail arrives. ...And every time you load the signature databases, I guess... What he probably means is that you should use ClamD/ClamDScan instead of ClamScan. Best regards Nico -- +--+ Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon? ___ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
Re: [Clamav-users] Can I give clam a list of files to scan
Matthew Dettinger wrote: So ultimately clamscan.exe will not take stdin. I will just have to run it like you state above... multiple time! By reloading clamscan.exe in and out of memory for every file at which point am I better off just scanning the entire drive recursively? Yes, Clam(D)Scan won't take more than one file from stdin. If you can't run the ClamD daemon and scan the files by using ClamDscan for some reason it would eventually be better to scan the entire drive, depending on the number of files to scan as was pointed out previously. Best regards, Nico -- +--+ Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon? ___ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
Re: [Clamav-users] Can I give clam a list of files to scan
The problem is that clamscan wants the files or directories passed to it via the command line, not via stdin-- besides which, Windows has a fairly limited max length for the command line. Actually it's not that limited (but still too limited for this purpose I guess). Windows XP/2k3 has a max command line length of 8191 characters and Win2k/NT has a limit of 2047. However, if the list of files can be provided externally it's not much of a problem. A simple .bat should do: @echo off for /F %%a in (files_to_scan.list) do clamdscan.exe %%a This example works for one filename per line. If you rather prefer to separate the filenames by some character, let's say ; it would look like: for /F delims=; %%a in (files_to_scan.list) do clamdscan.exe %%a Best regards, Nico -- +--+ Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon? ___ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
Re: [Clamav-users] TCP and UDP ports used by clamd
On 29.10.2004 at 15:46 René Berber is rumoured to have written: Now my question: why is clamd listening on a TCP port (only one port but the This is fine, ClamD has to listen on a port otherwise no program would be able to communicate with it. The port should be identical with the one listed in the clamd.pid file in case you're using it. port number varies) and also on 1,467 UDP ports? I was just about asking the same question. Over time ClamD (not FreshClam) opens (and leaves open) more and more UDP connections. Environment is Cygwin, latest Cygwin1.dll snapshot version latest (dev) versions of gcc and modules. Tnx in advance, Nico +---+ - Mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - No HTML mails please +---+ ___ http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users
