John Rudd wrote: > Luis Miguel R. wrote: >> El Monday, 24 December del 2007 a las 10:55:51AM, Dennis Peterson escribió: >>> Paul Kosinski wrote: >>>> In December 2006, we were running ClamAV 0.88.7, and there were still >>>> a fair number of "real" viruses being detected in inbound email. Now >>>> running 0.91.2 and 0.92, there seem to be only phishing attempts, and >>>> not even very many of them. In fact it seems that our log file shows >>>> almost as many (hourly) signature update messages as phish detections >>>> (much less "real" virus detections). >>>> >>>> Have other ClamAV users experienced a similar decline in email >>>> attacks? >> Yes. >> >> And this can be considered "bad news" for clamav integrators :). > > Most of the viruses that I used to get are blocked by my > bad-attachment-filename blocker. Block the really inappropriate stuff > (.exe, .com, .bat, .pif, and a list of about 20-30 others), and the > number of viruses that trickle through to clamav is amazingly small. > _______________________________________________
yes, that is true of me as well (see my other contribution). -- Cheers Brian Reliable, secure and affordable Office servers using Open Source software see: http://www.network-office-servers.co.uk _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
