In message <004701cadd95$cfec35b0$6fc4a1...@biz> "Giampaolo Tomassoni" <giampa...@tomassoni.biz> was claimed to have wrote:
>> And if the server owners / sysadmins feel that sending mail is more >> IMPORTANT than sending clean mail, they do not not need to install any >> AV software and their mail system will happily send out all it's >> mail.... > >I guess around 25-50% of the malware is old, well-known one. So it is not >that silly to have an outdated AV running to lower the received one. > >But anyway, we are speaking of stuff which worked. It wasn't perfect, but it >worked. And in this days the ClamAV staff decided to break it, without a >rationale close to the point. > >Isn't this weird? Is clamav a trustable project? This is what a sysadmin may >end thinking next time he/she installs a new system. If ClamAV went the other direction and just left people hanging with a false sense of security, all the while happily returning a "yup, not infected" to every file with modernish malware in it, there would be just as much "can I trust 'em?" As far as whether or not you can trust ClamAV, if this was sprung upon server operators without notice, that might be a consideration. It wasn't. The difference is that this screaming gets attention and gets the attention of incompetently managed server operators so that things get fixed. _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
