Re: [Clamav-users] Recomended nightly snap, or beta version ?
On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 08:57:35AM +0200, christian said: > On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 01:13:21AM +0100, Stephen Gran wrote: > > --- > > diff -Nru clamav-devel-latest/configure.in > > clamav-devel-latest.new/configure.in > > --- clamav-devel-latest/configure.in2006-08-26 02:30:04.0 +0100 > > +++ clamav-devel-latest.new/configure.in2006-08-31 > > 00:55:53.0 +0100 > > @@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ > > if test -z "$resolv_lib"; then > > AC_CHECK_LIB(resolv, dn_expand, resolv_lib="-lresolv",) > > fi > > -AC_CHECK_HEADER(resolv.h,[FRESHCLAM_LIBS="$FRESHCLAM_LIBS > > $resolv_lib"; AC_DEFINE(HAVE_RESOLV_H,1,have resolv.h)], > > AC_MSG_WARN([** DNS support disabled])) > > +AC_CHECK_HEADER(resolv.h,[FRESHCLAM_LIBS="$FRESHCLAM_LIBS > > $resolv_lib"; CLAMAV_MILTER_LIBS="$CLAMAV_MILTER_LIBS $resolv_lib"; > > AC_DEFINE(HAVE_RESOLV_H,1,have resolv.h)], AC_MSG_WARN([** DNS support > > disabled])) > > fi > > > > AC_ARG_ENABLE(clamuko, > > --- > > thank you - it's working! :-) > > where can one learn such witchcraft? > any fine manuals i could read? The autoconf book is available on line. As for the more meta issues that you might be asking (how do I learn shell scripting, how do I know which libraries need to appear on the link line given the headers that are included, etc) there are also several good references for those, but it mostly comes with time. Take care, -- -- | Stephen Gran | Nothing makes one so vain as being told | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | that one is a sinner. Conscience makes | | http://www.lobefin.net/~steve | egotists of us all. -- Oscar Wilde| -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
Re: [Clamav-users] Mail-Files scan showes only the first found virus
> On Mon, 28 Aug 2006, Jens Strohschnitter wrote: > > > yes indeed, but we have changed our mailscanner from sophos to clamAV, so > > some mailboxes have already the virus in the queue :-( > > > > Ehm, by the way, we are using amavis 0.3.13 as mailscanner, but the > > performance > > is very bad - is clamd working better for a mail-emergence up to 5000 > > mails/day ? > > >On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 14:34:42 +0200 (CAT) >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Here we are using clamav-0.88.4 with MailScanner-4.56.1 on a Celeron 2.8 > with 512 MB of RAM. We don't use clamd - just clamscan. That works like a > charm with from 15 to 25 thousand messages a day. There is never a > backlog of more than a couple of minutes. We are just using a standard > clone with ordinary IDE drive. On the other hand with our earlier server, > using an AMD-K6 500 MHz with only 256 MB of RAM we did struggle at times > when there was a large batch of incoming mail. Have a look at your swap > usage - ideally it should be used very little or not at all. If it is > being used then consider adding more RAM. > Hi sounds good - I will try out the mailscanner. -- Regards, Jens Strohschnitter - *!!!LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX!!!* * http://www.jens-strohschnitter.de * - Set the controls for the heart of the sun - ___ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
[Clamav-users] Clam and Malware/Trojans etc...
Could someone direct me to some good reading on Clam's ability to detect Malware/adware/Trojans etc. Maybe this is simple semantics, but I always see Clam advertised for Viruses, but not for Malware detection. I specifically am going to run it from a Linux environment to scan a mounted NTFS file system. Thanks in advance for the advice. mcd -- ** *** * *** *** ___ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
Re: [Clamav-users] Clam and Malware/Trojans etc...
On Aug 31, 2006, at 12:29 PM, mcd wrote: Could someone direct me to some good reading on Clam's ability to detect Malware/adware/Trojans etc. Maybe this is simple semantics, but I always see Clam advertised for Viruses, but not for Malware detection. ClamAV originally targetted email-bourne malware like viruses and phishing scams, rather than stuff which spreads via other vectors like worms and trojans. This being said, ClamAV is also used to do filesystem scanning and does recognize a lot of trojans and worms. It's not going to review cookies and registry entries the way something like Ad-Aware might; using more than one tool is a good idea in any event. I specifically am going to run it from a Linux environment to scan a mounted NTFS file system. OK. It should work for that purpose... -- -Chuck ___ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
Re: [Clamav-users] Recomended nightly snap, or beta version ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 01:13:21AM +0100, Stephen Gran wrote: >> It tries to run: >> It should be running: >-AC_CHECK_HEADER(resolv.h,[FRESHCLAM_LIBS="$FRESHCLAM_LIBS $resolv_lib"; >AC_DEFINE(HAVE_RESOLV_H,1,have resolv.h)], AC_MSG_WARN([** DNS support >disabled])) >+AC_CHECK_HEADER(resolv.h,[FRESHCLAM_LIBS="$FRESHCLAM_LIBS $resolv_lib"; >CLAMAV_MILTER_LIBS="$CLAMAV_MILTER_LIBS $resolv_lib"; >AC_DEFINE(HAVE_RESOLV_H,1,have resolv.h)], AC_MSG_WARN([** DNS support >disabled])) Thanks for that. I think I'm going to try and create something like the samba build farm. I want it to build with various commandlines, so instead of being centered around multiple hosts (different OS's), it will be centered around multiple commandline combinations. I'll work on getting that setup. It is in my offtime, so it won't be soon :-/ >You'll need to run ./configure with --enable-maintainer-mode or else it >won't rebuild after the change. Good to know, thanks. - -- Regards... Todd when you shoot yourself in the foot, just because you are so neurally broken that the signal takes years to register in your brain, it does not mean that your foot does not have a hole in it. --Randy Bush Linux kernel 2.6.12-18mdksmp 2 users, load average: 0.32, 0.34, 0.26 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFE91QXY2VBGxIDMLwRAnCgAJ9FbZrC/W19/O6Hhs8hw+hIxQGKZQCfQZVP 4YJQjmtR4oe+I7K0w6wJqRY= =dbjM -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
Re: [Clamav-users] Clam and Malware/Trojans etc...
Charles Swiger wrote: On Aug 31, 2006, at 12:29 PM, mcd wrote: Could someone direct me to some good reading on Clam's ability to detect Malware/adware/Trojans etc. Maybe this is simple semantics, but I always see Clam advertised for Viruses, but not for Malware detection. ClamAV originally targetted email-bourne malware like viruses and phishing scams, rather than stuff which spreads via other vectors like worms and trojans. This being said, ClamAV is also used to do filesystem scanning and does recognize a lot of trojans and worms. It's not going to review cookies and registry entries the way something like Ad-Aware might; using more than one tool is a good idea in any event. I specifically am going to run it from a Linux environment to scan a mounted NTFS file system. OK. It should work for that purpose... If you're not in a hurry - better is to install it locally on the Windows systems and test the local drives. Much less net traffic. dp ___ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
