Colleagues,
I upgraded ClamAV from 0.91.2 to 0.93.1 and found out that the
PhishingRestrictedScan option is gone.
I have always used PhishingRestrictedScan=no, how can I have the same
behaviour in 0.93.1? I don't mind some FPs because of this setting.
Thank you for any input.
--
Victor
On 08.07.08 12:49, Victor Sudakov wrote:
I upgraded ClamAV from 0.91.2 to 0.93.1 and found out that the
PhishingRestrictedScan option is gone.
I have always used PhishingRestrictedScan=no, how can I have the same
behaviour in 0.93.1? I don't mind some FPs because of this setting.
I don't
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
I upgraded ClamAV from 0.91.2 to 0.93.1 and found out that the
PhishingRestrictedScan option is gone.
I have always used PhishingRestrictedScan=no, how can I have the same
behaviour in 0.93.1? I don't mind some FPs because of this setting.
I don't
On 2008-07-08 10:29, Victor Sudakov wrote:
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
I upgraded ClamAV from 0.91.2 to 0.93.1 and found out that the
PhishingRestrictedScan option is gone.
I have always used PhishingRestrictedScan=no, how can I have the same
behaviour in 0.93.1? I don't mind some FPs
T?r?k Edwin wrote:
I upgraded ClamAV from 0.91.2 to 0.93.1 and found out that the
PhishingRestrictedScan option is gone.
I have always used PhishingRestrictedScan=no, how can I have the same
behaviour in 0.93.1? I don't mind some FPs because of this setting.
I don't
On 2008-07-08 12:08, Victor Sudakov wrote:
T?r?k Edwin wrote:
I upgraded ClamAV from 0.91.2 to 0.93.1 and found out that the
PhishingRestrictedScan option is gone.
I have always used PhishingRestrictedScan=no, how can I have the same
behaviour in 0.93.1? I don't mind some
T?r?k Edwin wrote:
I upgraded ClamAV from 0.91.2 to 0.93.1 and found out that the
PhishingRestrictedScan option is gone.
I have always used PhishingRestrictedScan=no, how can I have the same
behaviour in 0.93.1? I don't mind some FPs because of this setting.
Brian Morrison wrote:
Folks,
A problem has been found in 0.93.2 and it has to be withdrawn. Please do
not use it. We are working on a fix as a top priority.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
So what was the problem Nigel, 0.93.3 is working here now,
The problem related to a 3rd party library
Nigel Horne wrote:
So what was the problem Nigel, 0.93.3 is working here now,
The problem related to a 3rd party library used to load some of the
signatures used by ClamAV in its database.
OK, at least it was a short lived problem.
I am pleased that 0.93.3 is working for you.
So am I,
Hi!
After first # freshclam
the# /var/qmail/bin/simscanmk -g
work without any problem.
# ll
total 15788
-rw-r--r-- 1 clamav clamav 930977 Jul 8 10:17 daily.cvd
-rw-r--r-- 1 clamav clamav 15200793 Jul 8 10:17 main.cvd
-rw--- 1 clamav clamav 52 Jul 8 10:17
Sim wrote:
Hi!
After first # freshclam
the# /var/qmail/bin/simscanmk -g
work without any problem.
# ll
total 15788
-rw-r--r-- 1 clamav clamav 930977 Jul 8 10:17 daily.cvd
-rw-r--r-- 1 clamav clamav 15200793 Jul 8 10:17 main.cvd
-rw--- 1 clamav clamav 52
Sim wrote:
Hi!
After first # freshclam
the# /var/qmail/bin/simscanmk -g
work without any problem.
# ll
total 15788
-rw-r--r-- 1 clamav clamav 930977 Jul 8 10:17 daily.cvd
-rw-r--r-- 1 clamav clamav 15200793 Jul 8 10:17 main.cvd
-rw--- 1 clamav clamav 52
I've been reviewing our clamav configuration and noticed that we have:
PhishingScanURLs no
while the default in 0.93.1 is yes
What exactly does this test do? How many of you have it turned on and off?
--
Roberto Ullfig - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Help
I believe it follows links in HTML to see if they are phishing scams or not.
On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 11:36 AM, Roberto Ullfig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been reviewing our clamav configuration and noticed that we have:
PhishingScanURLs no
while the default in 0.93.1 is yes
What exactly
Roberto Ullfig wrote:
PhishingScanURLs no
while the default in 0.93.1 is yes
What exactly does this test do?
It uses heuristics to attempt to detect Phishing scams. I don't believe
it actually follows the links as was suggested by another poster.
We keep PhishingScanURLs turned off for a
Noel Jones wrote:
Where is daily.cvd ?
When incremental updates (the *.cdiff files) are applied, the
*.cvd file is replaced with a *.cld file. This replaces some
previous methods used for managing updates.
I'm finding I end up with both a main.cld and a main.cvd file, and clamd
Hello,
I get this in my daily scan reports:
LibClamAV Warning: Bad compression in flate stream
Could you please advise what is causing this?
ClamAV 0.92.1
Debian Lenny 2.6.21-2-686
--
Regards,
Veselin Kantsev
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Campbell-Lange Workshop
Dennis Peterson wrote:
Noel Jones wrote:
Where is daily.cvd ?
When incremental updates (the *.cdiff files) are applied, the
*.cvd file is replaced with a *.cld file. This replaces some
previous methods used for managing updates.
I'm finding I end up with both a main.cld and a
On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:01:57 +0100
Veselin Kantsev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I get this in my daily scan reports:
LibClamAV Warning: Bad compression in flate stream
Could you please advise what is causing this?
ClamAV 0.92.1
That's from the pdf handler, upgrade to 0.93.3 and
On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 12:08:26 -0500
Noel Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you have both a .cld and .cvd, just remove whichever is
older (likely the .cvd). Or remove them both and run freshclam.
This probably happened during a version upgrade. (Seems like
the install script should take
Thank you much Tomasz.
Veselin
On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 07:09:31PM +0200, Tomasz Kojm wrote:
On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:01:57 +0100
Veselin Kantsev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I get this in my daily scan reports:
LibClamAV Warning: Bad compression in flate stream
Could you please
21 matches
Mail list logo
