At 09:19 AM 12/30/2006, Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
How exactly is this better then a possibe false-positive, if a corrupted sig
happens to match some valid piece of mail ?
The maintainers don't distribute corrupted signatures, so if the sig
database is corrupted something is seriously wrong, and you have no
way of knowing the effect of the error.
What if the corrupted database matches EVERYTHING? Is it better to
reject (or discard!) all mail as viruses? Is it better to just
ignore the corrupted database and happily scan with no or limited signatures?
No, the current behavior is the safe choice.
--
Noel Jones
_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
