On 3/19/2010 5:52 PM, Andy Schmidt wrote:
Hi,
No I have
a little cscript I
wrote that iterates through subdirectories and takes parameters like
/lastweek /lastmonth etc.
If you're looking for something ready-made and don't need anything
extra I used to have good luck
On 3/19/2010 2:48 PM, Andy Schmidt wrote:
Thanks
If the rulebase does not properly authenticate in the SNF engine then the
reload is rejected.
Once the guard time expires the update script will be run again (by default
after 3 minutes).<<
Which also means, if the corrupt rulebase
On 3/19/2010 1:46 PM, Andy Schmidt wrote:
Hi Pete:
Thanks for jumping in.
1.>> The SNF engine performs the SNF2CHECK task before it accepts a new
rulebase<<
I'm a little confused - the script replaces the rulebase - without checking.
So what happens if the rulebase is bad. By the time the eng
On 3/19/2010 11:26 AM, Andy Schmidt wrote:
Thanks - downloaded and installed.
I'll have to take a look at the integrated Sniffer. I got pulled away and
never got back to it.
I'll have to take a good luck at the rulebase update - on first glace it
seems as if your script is leaving out the cruci
On Monday, June 23, 2008, 2:16:47 PM, Kevin wrote:
>
I have complained about this for a while now.
This process of fix the configuration the place in the proc folder only works if you are constantly pouring through your hold folders. We do not do that. We send an email to our users with
Note, I found and filtered a few of these today that used ordinary
links rather than numbered ones. I'm guessing the variants are already
out.
_M
On Monday, April 11, 2005, 6:01:24 PM, Greg wrote:
GL> Here's some background info on this pest (from another list).
GL> Greg Little
GL>
On Monday, March 7, 2005, 10:03:58 PM, Goran wrote:
GJ> I run this batch job every night at just before midnight. It does
GJ> everything you asked for and more :) and if you act quickly we can throw
GJ> in some steak knives.
GJ> And while I am at it does anyone have and batch code that will figur
On Friday, October 15, 2004, 11:31:38 PM, Greg wrote:
GH> I am running a dual 2.4HT 533 xeon with 1gig 2100 and 73 gig
GH> 10k sata drives. We process about 200k messages a day and I am
GH> starting to get complaints about slow delivery. As well we are
GH> running around 85% to 100% CPU util acr
S. You'll frighten them and they will swim to the other end of the
tank. %^b
On Wednesday, August 4, 2004, 9:59:18 AM, Bruce wrote:
BL> I have not seen anything since Monday am? Is it just this slow?
BL> Bruce
BL> ---
BL> [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.dec
I agree with the "sudden death" scenario. With Virus scanners it would
be helpful to stop after the first found virus.
If the first scanner is significantly more efficient than the others
(such as FProt) then the savings would be amplified quite a bit.
Since virus scanners are almost always "dumb
On Thursday, July 29, 2004, 1:36:45 PM, Marc wrote:
MC> Hi Sharyn.
MC>
MC> I haven't seen anything today either, maybe everyone in the
MC> north-east is out looking at that strange yellow object in the sky
MC> (the sun) and trying to dry out.
That's not the sun. It's a hologram projected overhe
On Tuesday, July 27, 2004, 4:38:49 PM, Dan wrote:
What about BNAZIPn where n is some number of levels or greater.
That is BANZIP3 instead of BANZIPZIPZIP, and in case someone wants to
allow 3 levels of depth (if it comes to that) BANZIP4...
_M
DG> I would like to request BANZIPINZIPINZIP.
DG>
On Thursday, July 22, 2004, 12:04:19 PM, Markus wrote:
>> Right now there IS a vast network of
>> zombies being used to send spam. If the virus writers sell
>> or give access to spammers, they could be giving access to
>> anyone and these compromised computers could be used just as
>> easily
I just got this thing - it looks like big trouble.
Don't follow the link. (I broke it up with spaces)
Just got this from CNN Osama Bin Laden has just been captured! A video and
some pictures have been released. Goto the link below for pictures, I will
update the page with the video as soon as I c
To clarify, group 62 is experimental.
Malware is in group 55.
_M
At 05:20 PM 3/19/2004, you wrote:
I'm a big fan of deeper
categorization. I believe these are listed in the Experimental
category presently, but due to some of the patterns in that rule base, I
actually score it lower than the othe
The Malware rule group (55) is designated for this. There is currently a
heuristic in there for any attempt to use the object vulnerability with a
numbered link - that is, a highly generalized form of the pattern used in
Bagle.Q.
It is possible to "renumber" any rule or rules upon request, but
Wdialupd / Porndial -
http://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/wdialupd.shtml
Probably a variant.
_M
|-Original Message-
|From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff
|Maze - Hostmaster
|Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 2:47 PM
|To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Subject: RE: [Declu
At 11:45 AM 8/23/2003 -0500, you wrote:
> THIS IS AN INCREDIBLE GROUP !
> DECLUDE IS AN INCREDIBLE PRODUCT !!!
> KUDUS to you Scott.
> Grateful THANKS to all the members who contributed yesterday !
Agreed! My users were protected even before receiving the updated DAT's due
to banning
18 matches
Mail list logo
