Re: [clamav-users] [Clamav-announce] ClamAV®: ClamAV Mailing List Maintenance, Monday, February 10th, 2014

2014-02-06 Thread Dennis Peterson
On 2/6/14, 3:12:09PM, Joel Esler (jesler) wrote: http://blog.clamav.net/2014/02/clamav-mailing-list-maintenance-monday.html ClamAV Mailing List Maintenance, Monday, February 10th, 2014 This notice is for the members of the ClamAV mailing lists found here: http://lists.clamav.net/mailman/list

Re: [clamav-users] Spam bounces from this list

2014-02-06 Thread Dennis Peterson
A simple process to do a name lookup on all the uribl.com authoritative name servers. Use dig to find the full list of round robin name servers. Dig output has tabs so I use expand to compress them to a single space for awk's sake. Awk isolates the A records and passes the IP to a while loop re

[clamav-users] ClamAV®: ClamAV Mailing List Maintenance, Monday, February 10th, 2014

2014-02-06 Thread Joel Esler (jesler)
http://blog.clamav.net/2014/02/clamav-mailing-list-maintenance-monday.html ClamAV Mailing List Maintenance, Monday, February 10th, 2014 This notice is for the members of the ClamAV mailing lists found here: http://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users On Monday, February 10th, 2014 s

Re: [clamav-users] Spam bounces from this list

2014-02-06 Thread Richard Conto
re: Dennis Peterson denni...@inetnw.com "nslookup geneslinuxbox.net.multi.uribl.com" is only going to tell someone where the first (of probably many) layered DNS servers are. Ubuntu 12.04 (LTS) takes this to an extreme by running a cacheing name server on the desktop. i.e.: Unfortunately, I'm n

Re: [clamav-users] Spam bounces from this list

2014-02-06 Thread Dennis Peterson
On 2/6/14, 1:54 PM, Bryan Burke wrote: Perhaps your blackholing problem is an indication of more problems - we can ask the members to repeat the nslookup of your domain to see if others get the results I got below. nslookup geneslinuxbox.net.multi.uribl.com should return address not found. If it

Re: [clamav-users] Spam bounces from this list

2014-02-06 Thread Bryan Burke
> Perhaps your blackholing problem is an indication of more problems - > we can ask the members to repeat the nslookup of your domain to see > if others get the results I got below. > > nslookup geneslinuxbox.net.multi.uribl.com should return address not > found. If it is 127.0.0.X then there is s

Re: [clamav-users] Spam bounces from this list

2014-02-06 Thread TR Shaw
$ nslookup geneslinuxbox.net.multi.uribl.com Server: 10.0.1.1 Address:10.0.1.1#53 ** server can't find geneslinuxbox.net.multi.uribl.com: NXDOMAIN On Feb 6, 2014, at 4:48 PM, Dennis Peterson wrote: > I'm not part of your problem or your solution. I don't own the TTL of the > rec

Re: [clamav-users] Spam bounces from this list

2014-02-06 Thread Dennis Peterson
I'm not part of your problem or your solution. I don't own the TTL of the records of remote DNS servers (should be under 5 seconds, but ??). However - your domain is no longer listed as of this post time, nor are several others logged today. The vendor may have had problems - their home page sug

Re: [clamav-users] Possible FP

2014-02-06 Thread Dennis Peterson
On 2/6/14, 7:54 AM, Douglas Goddard wrote: Looking at the original file and what was uploaded to VT, this signature is the md5sum of 43180 null bytes. While I would say this is definitely Junk.Corrupted, it's not malicious. I'll drop it. Thanks for the report. There's more you should do (and

Re: [clamav-users] Possible FP

2014-02-06 Thread Douglas Goddard
Looking at the original file and what was uploaded to VT, this signature is the md5sum of 43180 null bytes. While I would say this is definitely Junk.Corrupted, it's not malicious. I'll drop it. Thanks for the report. On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 6:12 AM, Steve Basford < steveb_cla...@sanesecurity.com

[clamav-users] Spam bounces from this list

2014-02-06 Thread Dennis Peterson
FYI - I had some bounces this week because Gene Heskett's URI in the following quote is trapped by uribl.com: nslookup geneslinuxbox.net.multi.uribl.com Server: 127.0.0.1 Address:127.0.0.1#53 Non-authoritative answer: Name: geneslinuxbox.net.multi.uribl.com Address: 127.0.0.2

Re: [clamav-users] An FP?

2014-02-06 Thread Gene Heskett
On Thursday 06 February 2014 07:07:09 Steve Basford did opine: > > Now, since the real thing is considered a high level threat to a win32 > > system, perhaps the thing to do is edit the .'s to DOT's, make a patch > > and submit it to lkml? I might see if its accepted. > > Sorry, forgot to add th

Re: [clamav-users] An FP?

2014-02-06 Thread Steve Basford
> Now, since the real thing is considered a high level threat to a win32 > system, perhaps the thing to do is edit the .'s to DOT's, make a patch and > submit it to lkml? I might see if its accepted. Sorry, forgot to add this: http://www DOT nirsoft DOT net/false_positive_report.html fwiw, I

Re: [clamav-users] An FP?

2014-02-06 Thread Steve Basford
>> c) It's a false positive and should be report to MBL as such > > And their contact address is? > To report false positives or list problems: fp (_a_t_) malwarepatrol.net Cheers, Steve Sanesecurity ___ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: ht

Re: [clamav-users] An FP?

2014-02-06 Thread Gene Heskett
On Thursday 06 February 2014 06:50:55 Ralf Hildebrandt did opine: > * Gene Heskett : > > > It's an UNOFFICIAL pattern, not a core clamav pattern > > > > Still, is it not un-needed noise? > > It's obviously a FP, but calling it un-needed noise is a bit off. If > the pattern were correct and would

Re: [clamav-users] An FP?

2014-02-06 Thread Gene Heskett
On Thursday 06 February 2014 06:31:40 Steve Basford did opine: > > The daily system scan is fussing about > > /home/gene/src/linux-3.8.2/Documentation/usb/gadget_multi.txt: > > MBL_400944.UNOFFICIAL FOUND > > Hi, > > Just seen your post on LKML, so before this get's any more out of hand > than i

Re: [clamav-users] Possible FP

2014-02-06 Thread Steve Basford
> Hi Clamav Users, > > I'm getting a FP-Alert from a customer regarding the following sig: > > main.hdb:15c9c9ed5046a885d241afd2159c236a:43180:Junk.Corrupted-50 > > The scan is done on our inbound authenticated mail host, which rejects our > customer's mail with the following error-message: Hi, T

Re: [clamav-users] Possible FP

2014-02-06 Thread Al Varnell
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 02:44 AM, Torge Husfeldt wrote: > I'm getting a FP-Alert from a customer regarding the following sig: > > main.hdb:15c9c9ed5046a885d241afd2159c236a:43180:Junk.Corrupted-50 > > The scan is done on our inbound authenticated mail host, which rejects our > customer's mail wi

[clamav-users] Possible FP

2014-02-06 Thread Torge Husfeldt
Hi Clamav Users, I'm getting a FP-Alert from a customer regarding the following sig: main.hdb:15c9c9ed5046a885d241afd2159c236a:43180:Junk.Corrupted-50 The scan is done on our inbound authenticated mail host, which rejects our customer's mail with the following error-message: Fehler: host smtp

Re: [clamav-users] An FP?

2014-02-06 Thread Ralf Hildebrandt
* Gene Heskett : > > It's an UNOFFICIAL pattern, not a core clamav pattern > > Still, is it not un-needed noise? It's obviously a FP, but calling it un-needed noise is a bit off. If the pattern were correct and would find a real virus, is it not un-needed noise? -- Ralf Hildebrandt

Re: [clamav-users] An FP?

2014-02-06 Thread Steve Basford
> The daily system scan is fussing about > /home/gene/src/linux-3.8.2/Documentation/usb/gadget_multi.txt: > MBL_400944.UNOFFICIAL FOUND Hi, Just seen your post on LKML, so before this get's any more out of hand than it already has, here's why you'll find MBL_400944 detected in gadget_multi.txt.