Let us take a look at separating them.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 7, 2019, at 14:03, Steve Basford
> wrote:
>
>> On 7 April 2019 17:25:56 Arnaud Jacques wrote:
>>
>>
>> ... and one day I created a *huge* ign2 file and it crashed clamd. Ign2
>> files may not be appropriate to ignore to
On 7 April 2019 17:25:56 Arnaud Jacques wrote:
... and one day I created a *huge* ign2 file and it crashed clamd. Ign2
files may not be appropriate to ignore tons of signatures.
From memory.. daily.info (inside the daily.cvd) contains the database names
included.
If all phishtank sigs we
Hello,
Le 07/04/2019 à 18:18, G.W. Haywood via clamav-users a écrit :
Hi there,
On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, Maarten Broekman wrote:
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 t
Hi there,
On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, Maarten Broekman wrote:
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
Having the Phishtank sigs as an additional optional database would be great
and, from my perspective, well worth the effort since we don't use them.
On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 9:44 AM Micah Snyder (micasnyd) via clamav-users <
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net> wrote:
> Tim,
>
>
>
> There are a couple of
Tim,
There are a couple of ways for users to drop specific categories of signatures
at this time. Sadly, they wouldn’t have helped this last week. These include
bytecode signatures, PUA (potentially unwanted applications) signatures,
Email.Phishing and HTML.Phishing signatures, and the Safebr
