Re: [clamav-users] running freshclam and 3rd party/clamav-unofficial-sigs.sh owner name changes occasionally

[Robert Kudyba]

>
>
> On Thu, 15 Jul 2021, Robert Kudyba wrote:
>

Here we are Aug 24


> >> ... do you have that log?
> >
> > Uploaded at ...
>
> Nothing remarkable there.  Presumably you're aware of this warning
> in that log?
>

See https://storm.cis.fordham.edu/~rkudyba/aug24

At 5:14 AM the problem started happening and cron has:

Aug 24 05:14:01 storm CROND[537748]: (clamav) CMD ([ -x
/usr/local/sbin/clamav-unofficial-sigs.sh ] && /usr/bin/bash
/usr/local/sbin/clamav-unofficial-sigs.sh)

Aug 24 05:14:03 storm CROND[537718]: (clamav) CMDEND ([ -x
/usr/local/sbin/clamav-unofficial-sigs.sh ] && /usr/bin/bash
/usr/local/sbin/clamav-unofficial-sigs.sh)
Aug 24 05:15:01 storm CROND[538116]: (root) CMD (/bin/date >> $FILE ;
/bin/ls -l /var/lib/clamav >> $FILE)

>
> If it's the same OS distribution you should be able to compare the
> configurations, see what they both put in the logs etc.  The command
>
> clamconf -n
>
> would be very useful for that but there are other configs as well.
>

clamconf -n

Checking configuration files in /etc


Config file: clamd.d/scan.conf

--

LogFile = "/var/log/clamd.log"

TCPSocket = "3310"

TCPAddr = "127.0.0.1"

User = "clamav"

PhishingScanURLs disabled

HeuristicScanPrecedence = "yes"

AlertBrokenExecutables = "yes"

AlertBrokenMedia = "yes"

AlertEncrypted = "yes"

AlertEncryptedArchive = "yes"

AlertEncryptedDoc = "yes"

AlertOLE2Macros = "yes"

AlertPhishingSSLMismatch = "yes"

AlertPartitionIntersection = "yes"

MaxScanTime = "35"

MaxScanSize = "157286400"

MaxFileSize = "31457280"


Config file: freshclam.conf

---

LogFileMaxSize = "262144000"

LogRotate = "yes"

UpdateLogFile = "/var/log/freshclam.log"

DatabaseOwner = "clamav"

DatabaseMirror = "database.clamav.net"

ConnectTimeout = "60"

ReceiveTimeout = "60"


Config file: mail/clamav-milter.conf



LogFile = "/var/log/clamav-milter.log"

LogTime = "yes"

LogVerbose = "yes"

User = "clamilt"

ClamdSocket = "tcp:127.0.0.1:3310"

MilterSocket = "inet:"

AddHeader = "Add"

Whitelist = "/etc/mail/clamav-milter-whitelist.conf"


Software settings

-

Version: 0.103.3

Optional features supported: MEMPOOL IPv6 AUTOIT_EA06 BZIP2 LIBXML2 PCRE2
ICONV JSON


Database information



Database directory: /var/lib/clamav

[3rd Party] badmacro.ndb: 621 sigs

[3rd Party] shelter.ldb: 49 sigs

[3rd Party] CVE-2013-0074.yar: 22 sigs

[3rd Party] foxhole_js.cdb: 48 sigs

[3rd Party] rfxn.yara: 11527 sigs

[3rd Party] urlhaus.ndb: 5445 sigs

[3rd Party] malware.expert.ndb: 1 sig

[3rd Party] sanesecurity.ftm: 170 sigs

[3rd Party] CVE-2013-0422.yar: 25 sigs

[3rd Party] sigwhitelist.ign2: 12 sigs

[3rd Party] junk.ndb: 55801 sigs

[3rd Party] jurlbl.ndb: 5650 sigs

[3rd Party] phish.ndb: 28047 sigs

[3rd Party] rogue.hdb: 1005 sigs

[3rd Party] scam.ndb: 12747 sigs

[3rd Party] spamimg.hdb: 200 sigs

[3rd Party] CVE-2015-1701.yar: 30 sigs

[3rd Party] spamattach.hdb: 14 sigs

[3rd Party] blurl.ndb: 2194 sigs

[3rd Party] CVE-2015-2426.yar: 49 sigs

[3rd Party] malwarehash.hsb: 771 sigs

[3rd Party] CVE-2015-2545.yar: 76 sigs

[3rd Party] foxhole_generic.cdb: 212 sigs

[3rd Party] CVE-2015-5119.yar: 22 sigs

[3rd Party] foxhole_filename.cdb: 2612 sigs

[3rd Party] CVE-2016-5195.yar: 40 sigs

[3rd Party] winnow_malware.hdb: 293 sigs

[3rd Party] winnow_extended_malware_links.ndb: 1 sig

[3rd Party] winnow_malware_links.ndb: 133 sigs

[3rd Party] MiscreantPunch099-Low.ldb: 1199 sigs

[3rd Party] winnow_extended_malware.hdb: 245 sigs

[3rd Party] safebrowsing.gdb: 49126 sigs

[3rd Party] winnow.attachments.hdb: 182 sigs

[3rd Party] CVE-2017-11882.yar: 66 sigs

[3rd Party] winnow_bad_cw.hdb: 1 sig

[3rd Party] EK_BleedingLife.yar: 112 sigs

[3rd Party] bofhland_cracked_URL.ndb: 40 sigs

[3rd Party] WShell_ASPXSpy.yar: 21 sigs

[3rd Party] bofhland_malware_URL.ndb: 4 sigs

[3rd Party] WShell_Drupalgeddon2_icos.yar: 26 sigs

[3rd Party] bofhland_phishing_URL.ndb: 72 sigs

[3rd Party] CVE-2010-0805.yar: 19 sigs

[3rd Party] bofhland_malware_attach.hdb: 1836 sigs

[3rd Party] CVE-2018-20250.yar: 22 sigs

[3rd Party] hackingteam.hsb: 435 sigs

[3rd Party] CVE-2018-4878.yar: 39 sigs

[3rd Party] porcupine.ndb: 6622 sigs

[3rd Party] bank_rule.yar: 11 sigs

[3rd Party] phishtank.ndb: 9388 sigs

[3rd Party] EMAIL_Cryptowall.yar: 52 sigs

[3rd Party] porcupine.hsb: 208 sigs

[3rd Party] scam.yar: 35 sigs

[3rd Party] securiteinfo.ign2: 86 sigs

[3rd Party] JJencode.yar: 19 sigs

[3rd Party] securiteinfo.hdb: 159918 sigs

[3rd Party] interserver256.hdb: 3626 sigs

[3rd Party] securiteinfoold.hdb: 3525608 sigs

[3rd Party] interservertopline.db: 161 sigs

[3rd Party] javascript.ndb: 43708 sigs

main.cvd: version 61, sigs: 6607162, built on Wed Jul 14 22:39:10 2021

[3rd Party] securiteinfohtml.hdb: 55106 sigs

[3rd Party] CVE-2010-0887.yar: 22 sigs

[3rd Party] securiteinfoascii.hdb: 98410 sigs

daily.cld: version 26272, sigs: 

Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!

[Micah Snyder (micasnyd) via clamav-users]

Hi Mark,

Thanks for the feedback on the Windows packages!

We should probably include the README.md and NEWS.md files.  Whoops.  Thanks 
for highlighting the discrepancy.

Regarding being down to 30 exe/dll files from 71 -- we used to bundle in a copy 
of the VC redistributable DLLs somewhat manually, which meant we went a little 
overkill, bringing in some that we didn't use.  Now CMake's CPack tool brings 
in the redistributables for us, and clearly do a better job, heh. We could 
probably shrink that number down even more if we wanted to statically compile 
the other library dependencies like libxml2, openssl, etc. But I think it's 
probably good how it is.

You pointed out that there are a few extra .lib files (e.g. freshclam.lib, 
clamav.lib, etc).  Those are required if you want to compile another project to 
link with libclamav.dll or libfreshclam.dll, and using the headers also now 
installed in the 'include' directory.  On windows to link with a DLL you must 
link with the .lib.  It's... strange.  And if a static library is built, that 
also shows as a .lib file and is often named differently, like 
'clamav_static.lib'.  I don't really expect anyone to do that on Windows, but I 
suppose can if they want.  I don't really see any point removing them or the 
'include' directory.

Regarding 'UserManual.html' and the 'UserManual' directory being moved to 
'html/index.html':  I wish I could make it look more how it used to.  I think 
it's less friendly to have an 'html' directory and require users to spot the 
'index.html' file.  I think we could probably rename the directory from 'html' 
back to 'UserManual' easily enough, but I don't think we can easily rename and 
move 'index.html' as easily.  And you're right, most people won't really care.  
The web is generally accessible. And if you are offline, it's not too tough to 
figure out.

Thanks again for your feedback on the RC2!  Do please reach out if there's 
anything else you run into.

-Micah


Micah Snyder
ClamAV Development
Talos
Cisco Systems, Inc.

From: clamav-users  on behalf of Mark 
Pizzolato - Clamav-Win32 via clamav-users 
Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2021 10:26 PM
To: ClamAV users ML ; 
clamav-annou...@lists.clamav.net 
Cc: Mark Pizzolato - Clamav-Win32 
Subject: Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release 
Candidate is here!


While testing what’s in the x64 windows portable zip file 
(clamav-0.104.0-rc2.win.x64.zip), I make the following observations:



1) Total executables and dlls goes down from 71 previously to 30 in 0.104.0 – 
This is likely a good sign.

2) The zip file includes 5 lib files which serve no purpose and probably should 
be removed.  Hmm I was going to say the same thing about the provided include 
directory, but then maybe both could be useful for locally built and linked 
programs.  I’m not testing anything like this…  None of these files were in the 
portable packages for prior versions.

3) Previous portable zip files included a README.md, a NEWS.md and 
UserManual.html (in addition to what’s in the now html directory which 
previously was called UserManual).  I never worried about what’s in these files 
or directories, but now they’re very different.

4) Otherwise, freshclam and clamd operate normally in my environment and are 
now in production.  If anything surprising happens, I’ll raise the problem here.



  *   Mark Pizzolato



From: clamav-users 
mailto:clamav-users-boun...@lists.clamav.net>>
 On Behalf Of Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2021 1:41 PM
To: ClamAV users ML 
mailto:ClamAV-users@lists.clamav.net>>; 
clamav-annou...@lists.clamav.net
Cc: Joel Esler (jesler) mailto:jes...@cisco.com>>
Subject: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate 
is here!



https://blog.clamav.net/2021/08/clamav-01040-second-release-candidate.html

ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!

Today we are publishing a second release candidate for 0.104.0. Please help us 
verify that 0.104.0-rc2 works on your systems and that we have resolved the 
concerns you reported with the first release candidate. We need your feedback, 
so let us know what you find and join us on the ClamAV mailing 
list, or on our 
Discord.

In particular, we'd love your feedback on the new Debian and RPM packages (see 
below) and on the install documentation on 
docs.clamav.net.

For details about what is new in the 0.104 feature release, please refer to the 
announcement for the first release 
candidate.



What changed since the first release candidate

First and foremost, we are listening to your concerns about 

Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!

[Micah Snyder (micasnyd) via clamav-users]

This conversation is a fun read!  But don't worry really no point removing the 
docs from the source package or the pre-compiled packages.  Including it is 
painless at this point.  If you're curious why, here's the process...

The documentation website source is hosted in our 
Cisco-Talos/clamav-documentation
 repo.

Any time there is a change to the docs, GitHub Actions automatically re-builds 
the static site using mdBook and force-pushes it to the 
gh-pages 
branch to publish it.

To include the docs in the source tarball, all we do (Jenkins does) is copy the 
contents of that branch into the 
clamav/docs/html 
directory before building the source package.

>From there, the build system takes care of it.  The docs/html directory is 
>bundled into the tarball, and when building the pre-compiled packages, the 
>html directory is marked for installation and so is included in each package.

That also means that if you're not building from the release tarball (i.e. if 
you're building from a git clone), you won't get an offline copy of the 
documentation.

-Micah

Micah Snyder
ClamAV Development
Talos
Cisco Systems, Inc.

From: clamav-users  on behalf of Paul 
Kosinski via clamav-users 
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2021 1:22 PM
To: clamav-users@lists.clamav.net 
Cc: Paul Kosinski 
Subject: Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release 
Candidate is here!

On Tue, 24 Aug 2021 10:48:48 +0100 (BST)
"G.W. Haywood via clamav-users"  wrote:

> Hi there,
>
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2021, Paul Kosinski via clamav-users wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 22 Aug 2021 14:42:06 +
> > "Joel Esler via clamav-users" wrote:
> >
> >> I’m a fan of the thought of removing the user manual completely
> >> from the downloaded packages and including a link to
> >> docs.ClamAV.net.  Since that’s more dynamic.
> >
> > I think that's a bad idea for three reasons:
> >
> > First, the Website might be (temporarily) inaccessible.
> >
> > Second, the machine running ClamAV may be blocked from accessing the 
> > Internet ...
> >
> > Finally, if the documentation is "dynamic", it presumably is for the latest 
> > release ...
>
> +1
>
> I suspect most ClamAV installations are via packages for the various
> distributions.  Please think about the distribution package managers.
> If the documentation were not included in the release tarballs they'd
> have a great deal more work to do, and the opportunities for errors
> and confusion would be increased out of all proportion.


Good point about the Release Managers.

Maybe the GPL should augmented to require docs to be available in the same way 
as the source code, when GPLed executables are distributed :-)


___

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml

___

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml

Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!

[Paul Kosinski via clamav-users]

On Tue, 24 Aug 2021 10:48:48 +0100 (BST)
"G.W. Haywood via clamav-users"  wrote:

> Hi there,
> 
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2021, Paul Kosinski via clamav-users wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 22 Aug 2021 14:42:06 +
> > "Joel Esler via clamav-users" wrote:
> >  
> >> I’m a fan of the thought of removing the user manual completely
> >> from the downloaded packages and including a link to
> >> docs.ClamAV.net.  Since that’s more dynamic.  
> >
> > I think that's a bad idea for three reasons:
> >
> > First, the Website might be (temporarily) inaccessible.
> >
> > Second, the machine running ClamAV may be blocked from accessing the 
> > Internet ...
> >
> > Finally, if the documentation is "dynamic", it presumably is for the latest 
> > release ...  
> 
> +1
> 
> I suspect most ClamAV installations are via packages for the various
> distributions.  Please think about the distribution package managers.
> If the documentation were not included in the release tarballs they'd
> have a great deal more work to do, and the opportunities for errors
> and confusion would be increased out of all proportion.


Good point about the Release Managers.

Maybe the GPL should augmented to require docs to be available in the same way 
as the source code, when GPLed executables are distributed :-)


___

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml

Re: [clamav-users] Authenticity token element not found

[G.W. Haywood via clamav-users]

Hello again,

On Tue, 24 Aug 2021, Philipp Ewald wrote:

On 8/24/21 3:17 PM, G.W. Haywood via clamav-users wrote:

On Tue, 24 Aug 2021, Philipp Ewald wrote:


since some mount we got errors while submitting FN to clamAV.

clamsubmit -e "EMAIL" -n "$virus" -N "DigiOnline" > /dev/null

"Authenticity token element not found."

I have found a patch that should fix this but cant find any update.


What version of ClamaV are you using?


we using ClamAV 0.103.2/26273/Tue Aug 24 10:21:17 2021


Please cut and paste the command (and the output which it produces) so
that we can see exactly what you're doing at the command line.

--

73,
Ged.

___

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml

Re: [clamav-users] Authenticity token element not found

[Philipp Ewald]

we using ClamAV 0.103.2/26273/Tue Aug 24 10:21:17 2021

installed from Debian apt list

clamav0.103.2+dfsg-0+deb10u1   amd64

many thanks for help!


kind regards


On 8/24/21 3:17 PM, G.W. Haywood via clamav-users wrote:

Hi there,

On Tue, 24 Aug 2021, Philipp Ewald wrote:


since some mount we got errors while submitting FN to clamAV.

clamsubmit -e "EMAIL" -n "$virus" -N "DigiOnline" > /dev/null

"Authenticity token element not found."

I have found a patch that should fix this but cant find any update.

Does someone know what to do?


What version of ClamaV are you using?



--
Philipp Ewald
Administrator

DigiOnline GmbH, Probsteigasse 15 - 19, 50670 Köln
Fax: +49 221 6500-690, E-Mail: philipp.ew...@digionline.de

AG Köln HRB 27711, St.-Nr. 5215 5811 0640
Geschäftsführer: Werner Grafenhain

Informationen zum Datenschutz: www.digionline.de/ds

___

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml

Re: [clamav-users] Authenticity token element not found

[G.W. Haywood via clamav-users]

Hi there,

On Tue, 24 Aug 2021, Philipp Ewald wrote:


since some mount we got errors while submitting FN to clamAV.

clamsubmit -e "EMAIL" -n "$virus" -N "DigiOnline" > /dev/null

"Authenticity token element not found."

I have found a patch that should fix this but cant find any update.

Does someone know what to do?


What version of ClamaV are you using?

--

73,
Ged.

___

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml

[clamav-users] Authenticity token element not found

[Philipp Ewald]

Hello,


since some mount we got errors while submitting FN to clamAV.

clamsubmit -e "EMAIL" -n "$virus" -N "DigiOnline" > /dev/null

"Authenticity token element not found."

I have found a patch that should fix this but cant find any update.

Does someone know what to do?


Kind regards
Philipp

--
Philipp Ewald
Administrator

DigiOnline GmbH, Probsteigasse 15 - 19, 50670 Köln
Fax: +49 221 6500-690, E-Mail: philipp.ew...@digionline.de

AG Köln HRB 27711, St.-Nr. 5215 5811 0640
Geschäftsführer: Werner Grafenhain

Informationen zum Datenschutz: www.digionline.de/ds

___

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml

Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!

[G.W. Haywood via clamav-users]

Hi there,

On Mon, 23 Aug 2021, Paul Kosinski via clamav-users wrote:


On Sun, 22 Aug 2021 14:42:06 +
"Joel Esler via clamav-users" wrote:


I’m a fan of the thought of removing the user manual completely
from the downloaded packages and including a link to
docs.ClamAV.net.  Since that’s more dynamic.


I think that's a bad idea for three reasons:

First, the Website might be (temporarily) inaccessible.

Second, the machine running ClamAV may be blocked from accessing the Internet 
...

Finally, if the documentation is "dynamic", it presumably is for the latest 
release ...


+1

I suspect most ClamAV installations are via packages for the various
distributions.  Please think about the distribution package managers.
If the documentation were not included in the release tarballs they'd
have a great deal more work to do, and the opportunities for errors
and confusion would be increased out of all proportion.

--

73,
Ged.

___

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml

Re: [clamav-users] Regarding Clam AV latest Signature on Ubuntu 18.04 OS

[G.W. Haywood via clamav-users]

Hello again,

On Tue, 24 Aug 2021, Amey Lele via clamav-users wrote:


Please check the attached screenshots for more details. On the ClamAV
web console it is showing a message as "An update is available", however in
logs it is showing the signature updated on 23rd Aug.(OS is Ubuntu 18.04).
Please confirm that the signature is properly updated, we just need
confirmation as we are not sure about signature update.


There's slightly more to it than this but I confirm that the 'daily'
part [*] of the signature database serial number 26272 was up to date
on Aug 23 2021.  Here is our system this morning:

$ freshclam --version
ClamAV 0.103.3/26272/Mon Aug 23 09:21:13 2021
$

It probably won't be long before another update.

[*] There are other parts to the 'official' signature database, and
there are 'unofficial' signature databases which you might want to
look at.  Check the mailing list archives for more information.

The signatures are updated frequently (at least daily).  ClamAV itself
is updated much less frequently (every few months).  Mr. Uhlar implies
that the warning message which you have posted refers to the fact that
there is an update available for the ClamAV software itself - not for
the signature database.  The ClamAV version which you are using is the
one currently supplied by the Ubuntu package manager.  You can if you
wish install the latest version of 0.103 (0.103.3)

https://blog.clamav.net/2021/06/clamav-01033-patch-release.html

but I recommend that you do not just yet attempt to install a release
candidate (0.104.x) because it still needs work.

Your freshclam configuration file should be modified to remove the use
of the 'SafeBrowsing' option, which was deprecated in April 2021:

https://blog.clamav.net/2021/04/clamav-01032-security-patch-release.html

Again, as M. Uhlar points out, it is better not to send screenshots to
a mailing list when you can send a few characters using cut-and-paste
(as I have above for the freshclam --version command).  Mailing lists
also generally prefer a concise format such as I have used here, with
only the necessary parts of messages being quoted.  Use your favourite
search engine to read about "mailing list etiquette".

What do you want ClamAV to do for you?

--

73,
Ged.

___

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml

Re: [clamav-users] Regarding Clam AV latest Signature on Ubuntu 18.04 OS

[Matus UHLAR - fantomas]

On 24.08.21 10:35, Amey Lele via clamav-users wrote:

Thanks for appreciating my English :) ! I am from India(Asia).

Please check the attached screenshots for more details.


instead of screenshot we prefer pasting output text - to the mail if short,
to pastebin or similar site and posting link if it's long.


On the ClamAV web
console it is showing a message as "An update is available", however in
logs it is showing the signature updated on 23rd Aug.(OS is Ubuntu 18.04).
Please confirm that the signature is properly updated, we just need
confirmation as we are not sure about signature update.


there is newer version of clamav available, but since it's 0.103.3 instead
of 0.103.2, it's no big deal - 0.103.2 is safe to use.

ubuntu 18.04 is LTS and going to be supported for a few years, which
includes uploading newer clamav versions if they are needed.

you can see current status on:
packages.ubuntu.com/clamav
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
I wonder how much deeper the ocean would be without sponges.

___

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml