My comments were mainly concerning CVD *validation*, not HTTPS.
Debian updates (for example) are delivered via plain HTTP, but they are
validated using standard GPG tools. Firefox (ESR) updates are handled
similarly (up to SHA512 hash, validated using GPG). I have more
confidence in standard GPG
I suspect we all read your concerns, but I have a problem understanding how
that translates into defining a true vulnerability and the resultant level of
severity.
Assuming someone goes to all the trouble of figuring out what the hard coded
public key embedded in ClamAV is, signs a fake .cvd
Hello Bowie,
I did a check on the SecuriteInfo signatures. I grepped my clamd logs for hits
on
SecuriteInfo signatures and then matched them to the file they came from.
#1 was spam_marketing.ndb with 110 hits
#2 was javascript.ndb with 10 hits
And that was it. securiteinfo.hdb,
Arnaud,
I now understand that we do not run the daemon. We update and scan from cron. I
stumbled on a work around I *think*
$ sigtool --version
ClamAV 0.99.4/25394/Wed Mar 20 07:52:02 2019
VS
$freshclam -V
ClamAV 0.99.4
Thanks,
Sean Clark <> Sr Network Engineer
“An ounce of prevention is
I think Alessandro was suggesting how it could work, not how it does work.
Clamd doesn't work that way at present. It has been a feature request for a
very long time, one that I hope we can address sometime soon, but I don't know
when.
Micah
Micah Snyder
ClamAV Development
Talos
Cisco
On 2019-03-19 14:35, Bowie Bailey wrote:
I do have a bunch of third party signatures installed from Sanesecurity
and
SecuriteInfo. Is there a way to get timing information on which
signature files are
taking the longest to load? Or is this mainly a function of file size?
Here's a quick
All these times, I would imagine, would be based on the amount of CPU and RAM,
even disk read speed, available to the machine loading. So these times are
relative.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 20, 2019, at 07:48, Steve Basford
> wrote:
>
>> On 2019-03-19 14:35, Bowie Bailey wrote:
>>
On 3/20/2019 2:57 AM, Arnaud Jacques wrote:
> Hello Bowie,
>
>> I did a check on the SecuriteInfo signatures. I grepped my clamd logs for
>> hits on
>> SecuriteInfo signatures and then matched them to the file they came from.
>>
>> #1 was spam_marketing.ndb with 110 hits
>> #2 was javascript.ndb
On 3/20/2019 8:42 AM, Alessandro Vesely via clamav-users wrote:
> On Tue 19/Mar/2019 15:35:39 +0100 Bowie Bailey wrote:
>
>> ClamAV is taking about 2 1/2 minutes to reload its database on my mail
>> server. This
>> seems to frequently happen when we are sending an email, so the Thunderbird
>>
Arnaud,
Thank you so much for the direction! I am still having problems. I get a server
working, but I try to apply what I thought was the fix to other servers and it
does not work. I am missing the target Could you/or someone help me with the
failure scenarios?
* the virus database is
On Tue 19/Mar/2019 15:35:39 +0100 Bowie Bailey wrote:
> ClamAV is taking about 2 1/2 minutes to reload its database on my mail
> server. This
> seems to frequently happen when we are sending an email, so the Thunderbird
> will time
> out on the send (although the message will frequently go
Sean,
Here is the resolution I applied when I get this problem (on Debian OS) :
# clamdscan -V
ClamAV 0.100.0
(not information about loaded databases)
vi /etc/systemd/system/clamav-daemon.socket.d/extend.conf
[Socket]
ListenStream=127.0.0.1:3310
(check if the 2 above lines are present)
On Wed 20/Mar/2019 14:53:28 +0100 Bowie Bailey wrote:
> On 3/20/2019 8:42 AM, Alessandro Vesely via clamav-users wrote:
>> On Tue 19/Mar/2019 15:35:39 +0100 Bowie Bailey wrote:
>>
>>> ClamAV is taking about 2 1/2 minutes to reload its database on my mail
>>> server. This
>>> seems to frequently
On 3/20/2019 2:57 PM, Alessandro Vesely via clamav-users wrote:
> On Wed 20/Mar/2019 14:53:28 +0100 Bowie Bailey wrote:
>
>> On 3/20/2019 8:42 AM, Alessandro Vesely via clamav-users wrote:
>>> On Tue 19/Mar/2019 15:35:39 +0100 Bowie Bailey wrote:
>>>
ClamAV is taking about 2 1/2 minutes to
Hi there,
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019, Micah Snyder wrote:
On 3/20/19, 10:04 AM, "clamav-users on behalf of Bowie Bailey"
wrote:
On 3/20/2019 8:42 AM, Alessandro Vesely via clamav-users wrote:
On Tue 19/Mar/2019 15:35:39 +0100 Bowie Bailey wrote:
ClamAV is taking about 2 1/2 minutes to reload its
On 3/20/2019 3:53 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> On 3/20/2019 2:57 PM, Alessandro Vesely via clamav-users wrote:
>> On Wed 20/Mar/2019 14:53:28 +0100 Bowie Bailey wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/20/2019 8:42 AM, Alessandro Vesely via clamav-users wrote:
On Tue 19/Mar/2019 15:35:39 +0100 Bowie Bailey wrote:
> The simplest way to achieve this right now would probably be to use
> two servers for scanning, and arrange for them to update their DBs
> at different times. A simple milter with a knowledge of the update
> schedule could choose which scanner to use just by checking the time.
> I imagine that
17 matches
Mail list logo
