> Maybe it's time to form a "ClamAV database group" or something, not that
> Tomasz doesn't do a good job, just that a group would not be as affected
> by vacations/death/sunshine/whatever as a single maintainer. I also
> believe that the single db maintainer is the most common argument
> again
Maybe it's time to form a "ClamAV database group" or something, not that
Tomasz doesn't do a good job, just that a group would not be as affected
by vacations/death/sunshine/whatever as a single maintainer. I also
believe that the single db maintainer is the most common argument
against ClamAV.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 09:57:03AM -0500, Jeffrey L. Taylor wrote:
> Quoting Robert Harrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> ClamAV's virus signature database is not as extensive and not updated
> as frequently as the commercial ones. Because of the rapidity of
Is there a way to help improve the database?
Quoting Robert Harrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I have file on my linux server called setup.exe which was placed on
> there using samba.
>
> when scaned from windows over the network norton reports funlove.4099
>
> when scanned using clamscan it reports that the file is clean.
>
> Using freshcla
I have file on my linux server called setup.exe which was placed on
there using samba.
when scaned from windows over the network norton reports funlove.4099
when scanned using clamscan it reports that the file is clean.
Using freshclam first and latest STABLE clamscan 0.54
anu ideas out there
Title: Message
I have a file placed
on the server using samba ie copied from windows to unix filing
system.
When I scan the file
from windows over samba noton reports funlove.4099 infection
When I scan with
clamscan it reports clean.
Any ideas out
there???
Robert Harrison IT
Manager
