On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 12:45 -0600, Damian Menscher wrote: > Another is your assertion that my "initial assumptions" were incorrect > when I suggested that phishing signatures were more likely to create > false positives as a result of being more likely to be matching > plaintext. Which initial assumptions were incorrect? Can you back your > assertion up with anything? >
Yes. Of the 126 Phishing signatures, 120 will only match in HTML documents, and 1 will only match in email messages - they aren't plaintext. -trog
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users
