-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 This is one of those little annoying logic problems one may have come across in examining truth tables and like conundrums within a philosophy class. I'll admit to the probability that I could be wrong. I'll explain my thoughts though regarding why I believe I'm right.
Each of the two statements does something unique. One scans for signatures, default yes. The other scans URLs, also default yes. Each option is unique and not sequential or parallel or otherwise related to one or the other choice. Following my own reasoning, I comment them out. I expect that as a result that the signatures are not scanned because the option is not enabled. Similarly I also expect that the scans for URLs will not take place, as that option is not enabled. As far as the program is concerned, there is no option because it sees none and so these particular options cannot be processed. In other words, for the program, the option doesn't exist. Again I'm not at all confident on the point, I'm merely attempting to reason it through. Allow me to consider the invocation of scanning signatures as the explanation discussing it is more explicit. It states "With this option enabled..." Again my choice is that this option is commented out. I don't see a mechanism whereby the program can make any decision regarding it because it cannot see it. In my thinking, the program merely moves onto another command it can act upon. As it cannot act on what it cannot see, no action by the program can be taken other than passing it by. Just because I don't see a mechanism doesn't mean there isn't one, perhaps I'm splitting hairs. In any case, I'll certainly reconsider the point but I'd certainly like to understand the mechanisms better. Currently I don't see the way the source is written as being similar to Boolean statements involving EITHER, AND or OR statements; in my view, the options to invoke these and other commands are not written that way, in my current understanding. I look forward to learning more, thanks for the opportunity. On Nov 19, 2007, at 3:21 PM, Dennis Peterson wrote: > Derick Centeno wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> I'm sure that you're aware that you can also switch that function off >> by merely commenting out those lines. > > My 0.91.2 sample clamd.conf file says: > > # With this option enabled ClamAV will try to detect phishing > attempts by using > # signatures. > # Default: yes > #PhishingSignatures yes > > # Scan URLs found in mails for phishing attempts using heuristics. > # Default: yes > #PhishingScanURLs yes > > > That doesn't agree with your statement. > > dp > > > _______________________________________________ > Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http:// > wiki.clamav.net > http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html ==================== You should avoid making yourself too clear even in your explanations. - -- Baltasar Gracian, Spanish philosopher 1601-1658 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) iD4DBQFHQgZAFvoPHRAQim0RAodyAJsGWI67eNAutrVgnU16i7bGP8davgCYvfYm 60WkmxsL38GzGfC7eJ9x/Q== =ijih -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
