This might be important for the OP too: On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 20:01 +0000, Camaleón wrote: > Ralf, I don't know why is that you don't want to give your points about > ClamAV, but saying "I don't like for several resons" and "ClamAV was > unreliable here..." without providing more data that proves the above, > well, I will have to take it as your "personal" POV and nothing more.
Virus detection most of the times was better using AVIRA. AVIRA was more stable and had a better for free support, perhaps AVIRA simply had more money and a longer time experience, than Sourcefire, dunno. Again, YMMV, it's just what I experienced. What details are missing? I don't have statistics. It might be that I had to protect XP users and you needed to protect 98se or Vista users and AVIRA simply had a better database for virulent software that only attacks XP, dunno. I didn't automate anything, just run manually from a terminal emulation. Setting up auto-scanning for e.g. emails might be more difficult for AVIRA, dunno, at least default settings for my needs were easier to set up. So if somebody asks for CLI tools, I only can mention tools I know and I only know Clam and AVIRA, since Clam already was mentioned I mentioned AVIRA only, but add my experiences. I can't give you more information. Perhaps the OP is interested in your better experiences and the reasons for that, with Clam. I don't know why AVIRA was more stable on my machine, it simply happened and I didn't search for the reason. I only can repeat, that bug reports were ignored by Clam and AVIRA did take care very well. Hth -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1340225178.2803.216.camel@precise
