"G.W. Haywood via clamav-users" <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net> wrote: > > In the second scan, how did clamscan manage to do what it claims to > have done in the time that it did it?
OK, you could have just said that the cache is internal to each invocation of clamscan, but that helps. > For further enlightenment, on one of your systems try doing something > similar to what I did above but using 'clamdscan'. The problem with clamdscan is that it runs into permissions since it's not running as root. > Consider using a > central clamd server for all your scanning needs. How would that work? Clamd only scans files on the system on which it's running. > I doubt anyone is doing that. I'm sure it isn't necessary, as it's > already taken care of by both clamscan and clamd. Perhaps if you can > be a bit more forthcoming about your use case(s) we may be able to > help reduce scan times. One of the best ways of doing that is not to > scan so much junk so often. We've got about 3000 Linux systems that we'd like to periodically scan, primarily to ensure that they're not being used to redistribute Windows malware. We'd like to scan all of the local file systems for completeness. Any attempt to skip "junk" will potentially skip malware, and hand crafting scans for each system is not an option. Skipping multiple copies of the same file won't really help because the duplication is across systems, and because every file will be rescanned every time clamscan is run. We could do a full scan on the first run and then weekly scans of files modified in the past week. That's kludgy but may be the best we can do. -Dave _______________________________________________ clamav-users mailing list clamav-users@lists.clamav.net https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
