On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 13:54:02 +0100 Jan-Frode Myklebust <janfr...@tanso.net> wrote: > Could someone please give some insight into what happened > the the v12663 daily.cld? How long did it take to notice the > problem, and how quickly was it fixed?
The database included a signature which was not compatible with ClamAV 0.95.x and older. The problem was fixed after reports sent to this ml. We run backward tests only on the last two release series, right now on 0.97.x and 0.96.x. 0.95.3 is already 16 months old so you should consider upgrading it if you want to avoid this kind of issues. > For us it took down clamd on 15 servers at 00:03 today, and > we received the fix 3 hours later... but clamd wasn't restarter > before later this morning, leading to huge mailqueues. > > We should probably look into verifying the db before telling > clamd to reload it... Upgrading to some recent version is also one of the options. The current version of freshclam has a special option "TestDatabases", which is enabled by default and makes sure the new databases can be loaded properly before they get installed in the system. Regards, -- oo ..... Tomasz Kojm <tk...@clamav.net> (\/)\......... http://www.ClamAV.net/gpg/tkojm.gpg \..........._ 0DCA5A08407D5288279DB43454822DC8985A444B //\ /\ Fri Feb 11 14:05:55 CET 2011 _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
