[Clamav-users] virus threats to Linux (was: PhishingScanURLs is dreadfully slow/CPU-intensive)

2007-11-13 Thread Tilman Schmidt
Kelson schrieb: Tilman Schmidt wrote: Also, OpenOffice on Linux is normally run from a non-privileged user ID, heavily limiting the ability of any malicious macro to harm or propagate. Huh? What difference does running as a non-privileged user make when the method of infection is to

Re: [Clamav-users] Error message appended to subject line

2007-11-13 Thread Nigel Horne
Tony Baker wrote: Hi after a recent upgrade of ClamAV Some mail is having (No virus check: internal error) appended to the subject line. That message appears nowhere in the ClamAV source code, so I presume it's generated by some 3rd party software which you haven't told us you're using

[Clamav-users] Error message appended to subject line

2007-11-13 Thread Tony Baker
Hi after a recent upgrade of ClamAV Some mail is having (No virus check: internal error) appended to the subject line. However checking through the logs the mail is showing that is Passed CLEAN Can someone tell me where this appending of the subject line is being generated from. More

Re: [Clamav-users] Error message appended to subject line

2007-11-13 Thread Tony Baker
Tony Baker wrote: Hi after a recent upgrade of ClamAV Some mail is having (No virus check: internal error) appended to the subject line. Nigel Horne wrote: That message appears nowhere in the ClamAV source code, so I presume it's generated by some 3rd party software which you haven't

Re: [Clamav-users] Error message appended to subject line

2007-11-13 Thread Rob MacGregor
On Nov 13, 2007 10:42 AM, Tony Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Apologies if I have sent this to the wrong list, but the message started occurring after an upgrade of ClamAV. I have also upgraded spamassassin and amavis-new, but the messages started after upgrading ClamAV. ---SNIP--- Do you

Re: [Clamav-users] Accurate subjects (was Re: PhishingScanURLs is dreadfully slow/CPU-intensive)

2007-11-13 Thread Jan-Pieter Cornet
On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 04:22:47PM -0500, David F. Skoll wrote: My own opinion is that the developers are not going to change the default settings since they are what the majority of users would want enabled by default. Really? All posters on this thread who gave an opinion wanted

Re: [Clamav-users] Accurate subjects (was Re: PhishingScanURLs is dreadfully slow/CPU-intensive)

2007-11-13 Thread G.W. Haywood
Hi there, On Monday November 12, 2007 at 04:22:47 (PM) David F. Skoll wrote: Really? All posters on this thread who gave an opinion wanted PhishingScanURLs off by default. I invite users who want PhishingScanURLs to be on by default to come forward; I'll happily go with the majority

Re: [Clamav-users] Accurate subjects (was Re: PhishingScanURLs is dreadfully slow/CPU-intensive)

2007-11-13 Thread David F. Skoll
G.W. Haywood wrote: I invite users who really care about this issue to send mail directly to Mr. Skoll, and not to add to the noise on the ClamAV mailing list. OK. Off-list to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and I will summarise. There are more important issues. Please let's kill this thread. There are

Re: [Clamav-users] Accurate subjects (was Re: PhishingScanURLs is dreadfully slow/CPU-intensive)

2007-11-13 Thread jef moskot
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 Dennis Peterson wrote: Even timid users need to edit the file as a minimum to disable the Example line. Another point is that those who use clamscan (not the daemon) will have the default behavior changed more invisibly. You have to pass a parameter to disable the