On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:04:39 -0800 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ken Jones wrote: > > I think the thing to remember here is that we are discussing > > scanning of email. If the email is malicious, then having clamav > > remove it is a good thing in my opinion. Spam (uce/ube) that poses > > no threat to the user, and is just an anoyance is what SA should be > > catching. > > ClamAv is marketed as an antivirus tool. I think, as you say, there > is a need for a generic anti-malware tool. But don't call it clamav.
So, in addition to phishing, we shouldn't detect trojans as well? Oh, let's create ClamAT! Wake up! It's the XXI century and not the old, good DOS times when there were five types of viruses and (almost) no other malware. The users arguing about phishing detection should visit http://www.antiphishing.org to learn more about this special type of _attack_. -- oo ..... Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (\/)\......... http://www.ClamAV.net/gpg/tkojm.gpg \..........._ 0DCA5A08407D5288279DB43454822DC8985A444B //\ /\ Mon Nov 15 21:36:08 CET 2004
pgpJ9DdP9da0Z.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users
