We usually acknowledge every community signature submission, and even work with submitters to tweak the signature if needed.
I see that you submitted a few signatures in the past few hours, which we will acknowledge and review in a few hours. If there are signatures that you've submitted in the past that we did not acknowledge, they somehow have fallen through the cracks and I sincerely apologize for that. If you could be so kind to point them out, we'll let you know what their status is. Thanks, - Alain On Thursday, July 14, 2016, Arnaud Jacques / SecuriteInfo.com < webmas...@securiteinfo.com> wrote: > Hello Joel, > > > You're right. Nothing I said was negative. We know exactly what > happens > > when our testing is done. We don't know in other cases. I didn't say > > anything about the quality of 3rd party signatures. In fact, the > quality > > is so good, that's exactly why we are rolling out the program to protect > > more people. > > I have couple of signatures, handmade, I submited to community-sigs. And I > have *no news* from them. > Did they pass false positive tests ? Are they wrong ? Will they be > published one day ? Do Clamav want > better detection ratio ? If yes, the minimum is to provide news for > sigmakers that sumbit their signatures > (time and efforts) to community-sigs to be included in official Clamav > databases. > > > > Protecting customers is a good thing. We're always going to try and do > > that. > > We (third parties) do that too ;) > > -- > Best regards, > > Arnaud Jacques > SecuriteInfo.com > > Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/pages/SecuriteInfocom/132872523492286 > Twitter : @SecuriteInfoCom > _______________________________________________ > Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: > https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq > > http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml > _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
