Joel Esler wrote:
> This is fantastic feedback.
> I’ve incorporated the fixes (and missing pages!) you’ve suggested below.
Thanks, it's much better now!
I'll use PRs for the rest.
I might come back this week with actual problems/bugs, now that I can
claim to have read the instructions and not fo
ClamAV is not the only project we run. When you all (or we) discover an issue,
I take that information, file a ticket with our operations team, and the issues
are resolved as we get to them, just like any other infrastructure. Not only
do we run ClamAV, but we run Snort, and entire Talos infra
Reindl Harald wrote:
> don't matter - instead of writing a mail that should have been just fixed
I'm pretty sure the author was "filing a bug report" and not in a
position to fix it...
I'd hope that user MLs would not be particularly hostile to users
reporting things that need to be fixed...
> i
Am 12.12.2016 um 00:25 schrieb timeless:
Firefox reports:
"bugs.clamav.net uses an invalid security certificate. The certificate is
only valid for bugzilla.clamav.net Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN"
You can bypass the warning if desired.
(FWIW, Chrome also allows this)
Benny Peder
> Firefox reports:
>> "bugs.clamav.net uses an invalid security certificate. The certificate is
>> only valid for bugzilla.clamav.net Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN"
>> You can bypass the warning if desired.
(FWIW, Chrome also allows this)
Benny Pedersen wrote:
> worst advise you ever hav
Reindl Harald wrote:
> see attachment - a simple file-upload piping a eml-file through 2 different
> clamd-instances (different signatures and spamassassin-scorings) and finally
> also to spamd to verify rule/score changes of previously received mails
If you included an attachment, I'm pretty sur
