[Clamav-users] Are we safe - WORM_BAGLE.AZ

2005-01-27 Thread Craig Daters
I'm thinking that someone has submitted this, and we already have the update...but does anyone know for sure if we are safe from this. WORM_BAGLE.AZ is what Trend Net is referring to this as, there message to me this morning follows: As of January 27, 2005 1:42 AM PST (Pacific Standard

Re: [Clamav-users] Are we safe - WORM_BAGLE.AZ

2005-01-27 Thread Trog
On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 07:01 -0700, Craig Daters wrote: I'm thinking that someone has submitted this, and we already have the update...but does anyone know for sure if we are safe from this. WORM_BAGLE.AZ is what Trend Net is referring to this as, there message to me this morning follows:

Re: [Clamav-users] Are we safe - WORM_BAGLE.AZ

2005-01-27 Thread Craig Daters
Trog wrote: It is detected by Clam as Trojan.Downloader.Small-165, which was added on 8th Nov 2004 by Christoph. Wow, that was some time ago, and TrendNet is only just now putting out an update! That's scarry! Thanks Trog -- Craig Daters ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Systems Administrator West Press Print

RE: [Clamav-users] Are we safe - WORM_BAGLE.AZ

2005-01-27 Thread Randal, Phil
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Trog wrote: It is detected by Clam as Trojan.Downloader.Small-165, which was added on 8th Nov 2004 by Christoph. Wow, that was some time ago, and TrendNet is only just now putting out an update! That's scarry! Thanks Trog -- Craig Daters ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

RE: [Clamav-users] Are we safe - WORM_BAGLE.AZ

2005-01-27 Thread sk3tch
Craig Daters Wow, that was some time ago, and TrendNet is only just now putting out an update! That's scarry! Thanks Trog What concerns me (if it is true that ClamAV has detected this specific variant since November) is that ClamAV is not performing due diligence and sharing samples to protect

RE: [Clamav-users] Are we safe - WORM_BAGLE.AZ

2005-01-27 Thread Randal, Phil
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Craig Daters Wow, that was some time ago, and TrendNet is only just now putting out an update! That's scarry! Thanks Trog What concerns me (if it is true that ClamAV has detected this specific variant since November) is that ClamAV is not performing due

RE: [Clamav-users] Are we safe - WORM_BAGLE.AZ

2005-01-27 Thread Trog
On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 09:13 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Craig Daters Wow, that was some time ago, and TrendNet is only just now putting out an update! That's scarry! Thanks Trog What concerns me (if it is true that ClamAV has detected this specific variant since November) is that

Re: [Clamav-users] Are we safe - WORM_BAGLE.AZ

2005-01-27 Thread Tomasz Kojm
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 11:35:24 -0500 Don Levey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmm... Passed right through my setup, without detection. Database updated as recently as 4:am today. So better update your software ASAP. -- oo. Tomasz Kojm [EMAIL PROTECTED] (\/)\.

Re: [Clamav-users] Are we safe - WORM_BAGLE.AZ

2005-01-27 Thread Brian Morrison
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 11:35:24 -0500 in [EMAIL PROTECTED] Don Levey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmm... Passed right through my setup, without detection. And your setup is? Database updated as recently as 4:am today. That's more than 7 *hours* ago... -- Brian Morrison bdm at fenrir dot org

Re: [Clamav-users] Are we safe - WORM_BAGLE.AZ

2005-01-27 Thread Tomasz Papszun
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 at 11:35:24 -0500, Don Levey wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 07:01 -0700, Craig Daters wrote: WORM_BAGLE.AZ is what Trend Net is referring to this as, there message to me this morning follows: It is detected by Clam as