On Thursday 19 April 2007 5:59 pm, Bill Landry wrote:
> Bill Landry wrote the following on 4/19/2007 3:54 PM -0800:
> > Chris wrote the following on 4/19/2007 3:38 PM -0800:
> >> Odd, the file was this size at 8:09am CDT
> >>
> >> sent 82 bytes received 85 bytes 334.00 bytes/sec
> >> total size i
Bill Landry wrote the following on 4/19/2007 3:54 PM -0800:
> Chris wrote the following on 4/19/2007 3:38 PM -0800:
>
>> Odd, the file was this size at 8:09am CDT
>>
>> sent 82 bytes received 85 bytes 334.00 bytes/sec
>> total size is 226391 speedup is 1355.63
>> receiving file list ... done
Chris wrote the following on 4/19/2007 3:38 PM -0800:
> Odd, the file was this size at 8:09am CDT
>
> sent 82 bytes received 85 bytes 334.00 bytes/sec
> total size is 226391 speedup is 1355.63
> receiving file list ... done
> /var/tmp/rsync/MSRBL-Images.hdb
>
> sent 20936 bytes received 118747
Odd, the file was this size at 8:09am CDT
sent 82 bytes received 85 bytes 334.00 bytes/sec
total size is 226391 speedup is 1355.63
receiving file list ... done
/var/tmp/rsync/MSRBL-Images.hdb
sent 20936 bytes received 118747 bytes 55873.20 bytes/sec
total size is 12024436 speedup is 86.08
Christoph Cordes wrote:
> Joe Evans schrieb:
>
>
>> Can anyone shed some light on the log entries below?
>>
>> (1) "Can't calculate offset for signature Trojan.Mybot-5073"
>> (2) "Broken PE file"
>>
>>
>
> The file is broken. This happens very often with such samples
> (SdBot/Mybot). With C
Joe Evans schrieb:
> Can anyone shed some light on the log entries below?
>
> (1) "Can't calculate offset for signature Trojan.Mybot-5073"
> (2) "Broken PE file"
>
The file is broken. This happens very often with such samples
(SdBot/Mybot). With ClamAV .9x the recognition of broken executables
Christoph Cordes wrote:
> Joe Evans schrieb:
>
>> After upgrading to the latest version of ClamAV, I've noticed some files
>> not being detected with v0.90.2, which were detected with v0.88.7. Could
>> there be a bug with the pattern scanning portion of libclamav, or am I
>> missing something
Joe Evans wrote:
> After upgrading to the latest version of ClamAV, I've noticed some files
> not being detected with v0.90.2, which were detected with v0.88.7. Could
> there be a bug with the pattern scanning portion of libclamav, or am I
> missing something obvious?
>
> Both test cases are usi
Joe Evans schrieb:
> After upgrading to the latest version of ClamAV, I've noticed some files
> not being detected with v0.90.2, which were detected with v0.88.7. Could
> there be a bug with the pattern scanning portion of libclamav, or am I
> missing something obvious?
>
> Both test cases are
After upgrading to the latest version of ClamAV, I've noticed some files
not being detected with v0.90.2, which were detected with v0.88.7. Could
there be a bug with the pattern scanning portion of libclamav, or am I
missing something obvious?
Both test cases are using the same signature databa
Hello, Rob.
>> Try this patch:
>> http://citrin.ru/stuff/clamav/patch-0.90.1-matcher-ac.c
>>
>> Also see:
>> https://wwws.clamav.net/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=434
> Is this an issue if using clamdscan vs. clamscan? Is this patch
> recommended for speeding up 0.90.2? We're running 0.88.7 and want
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Rick Macdougall wrote:
> > I upgraded clamav a few days ago from 0.90.1 to 0.90.2 and found that
> > clamscan's performance had deminished tremendously. The time required to
> > scan a single 49 KB file increased from 19 seconds to 36 seconds! Now
> > that scanning for viruse
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Christophe Goudey wrote:
> I just upgraded Clamav with clamav 0.90.2-0volatile1 on debian.
>
> clamd.log says : Loaded 215153 signatures
>
> freshclam.log says :
> main.inc is up to date (version: 43, sigs: 104500, f-level: 14, builder:
> sven)
>
Wilmar Salgado Ariza in message '[Clamav-users] Fallas con Clamd+amavis' wrote:
> Gracias por su colaboración.
>
> Tengo la siguiente falla cuando envío correos:
>
> (host 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1] said: 451 4.5.0 Error in processing, id=23085-04,
> virus_scan FAILED: virus_scan: ALL VIRUS SCANNERS FA
Gracias por su colaboración.
Tengo la siguiente falla cuando envío correos:
(host 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1] said: 451 4.5.0 Error in processing, id=23085-04,
virus_scan FAILED: virus_scan: ALL VIRUS SCANNERS FAILED: ClamAV-clamd
av-scanner FAILED: Too many retries to talk to 127.0.0.1:3310 (Can't conn
Alan Stern wrote:
> I upgraded clamav a few days ago from 0.90.1 to 0.90.2 and found that
> clamscan's performance had deminished tremendously. The time required to
> scan a single 49 KB file increased from 19 seconds to 36 seconds! Now
> that scanning for viruses is a factor of two slower, my em
I upgraded clamav a few days ago from 0.90.1 to 0.90.2 and found that
clamscan's performance had deminished tremendously. The time required to
scan a single 49 KB file increased from 19 seconds to 36 seconds! Now
that scanning for viruses is a factor of two slower, my email server is
constantly b
I saw the problem when building from source rather than ports.
FreeBSD 6.0 is from my hosting provider, who just updated it
without updating to 6.2. I try to diverge from their standard
platform only for good cause (a build problem doesn't qualify).
All that should be needed for the standard rele
My server is running Solaris 10, Sendmail 8.13.8, I upgraded clamav from
0.88.7 to 0.90.2.
(Blastwave build). I first got a bunch of errors of the form :
ERROR: Parse error at line 228: Option ScanArchive requires boolean
argument.
/opt/csw/sbin/clamav-milter: Can't parse the config file
/opt/csw
Steven Stern wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Dennis Peterson wrote:
>> Steven Stern wrote:
>>
>>> Robert Niepel wrote:
Hello,
an anyone tell me where i can get RPM?s for Fedora Core 4?
Or has anyone have an hotwo to build those rpm from tar.gz?
___
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
Hi, now on Fedora Core 3 I have installed:
clamav-0.88.7-1
...but I have a problem with building rpm for 0.90.2-1 clam version.
When I execute:
#rpmbuild --target i386 -ba SPECS/clamav.spec
...
...
Requires: /bin/sh clamav = 102:0.90.2-1 config(clamav-server) = 102:0.90.2-1
libc.so.6 libc.so.6(G
Hello,
> A problem emerged with release 0.90 under FreeBSD 6.0, that
> involved an error message in the configure process of form:
> GNU MP2 or newer NOT FOUND - digital signature support will be disabled!
[...]
> Unfortunately, this fix does not seem to have been picked up by the
> clamav devel
Steven Stern wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Dennis Peterson wrote:
>> Steven Stern wrote:
>>
>>> Robert Niepel wrote:
Hello,
an anyone tell me where i can get RPM?s for Fedora Core 4?
Or has anyone have an hotwo to build those rpm from tar.gz?
I just upgraded Clamav with clamav 0.90.2-0volatile1 on debian.
clamd.log says : Loaded 215153 signatures
freshclam.log says :
main.inc is up to date (version: 43, sigs: 104500, f-level: 14, builder:
sven)
daily.inc is up to date (version: 3128, sigs: 6153, f-level: 15, builder:
ccordes)
So, wh
25 matches
Mail list logo
