On 2/8/22 10:50, Marc wrote:
That is the problem of the server that is contacting mine. They should not be
relaying such crap to me anyway.
No, this is *your* problem.
If you start annoying people with inappropriate bounces, you'll get into
blacklists fast.
In any case, we are OT, so I'l
On 2/8/22 09:40, Marc wrote:
There is a difference between rejecting the message and having the client
server decide whether or not it creates a message to the sender. (which is what
I want)
Sorry, I find that unclear; please explain better.
my server is generating a message to the sende
On 2/7/22 22:36, Marc wrote:
however when I send a virus it looks like sendmail is not reporting the reject
back to the client server.
How should I 'enable' this?
Don't.
Viruses are usually sent with a spoofed sender address; you would only
annoy victims who didn't really send what you rece
On 2020-04-22 15:14, Graeme Fowler via clamav-users wrote:
Additionally, if your PCI assessor is insistent on anti-virus apps being
installed on web servers then they're not very good;
I agree with that.
From what I understand about your situation, perhaps you are not
looking for an antiviru
On 2020-04-01 17:36, G.W. Haywood via clamav-users wrote:
My approach would probably be to start with very little in
the signature database(s) and gradually add things which might prove
useful, at the same time excluding anything which might be expected to
be nearly useless in this application,
On 2020-04-02 08:14, Andrea Venturoli wrote:
P.S.
I'm investigatint your other message about the reload patch.
Patch is working.
However almost nothing has changed: from the logs I see DB reloads
twice/three times per day... hard to hit if you try :) and in the
meanwhile I still see slowness
On 2020-04-01 19:38, Henrik K wrote:
>> But pretty much all
>> websites are SSL encrypted these days, so there's nothing to scan
>> unless you do nasty man-in-the-middle decryption. Everyone has virus
>> scanners on their PC, browsers have all sorts of proctection etc.
>> The days of proxy scann
On 2020-04-01 16:08, Vladislav Kurz via clamav-users wrote:
Hello,
Thanks for your answer.
Are you running clamav as daemon?
Sure.
Is c-icap using the daemon socket (as if runing clamdscan)?
AFAIK it does.
I've got this in its config:
# Path to the clamd socket, use clamd_local if
Hello.
I'm trying the combination Squid + C-ICAP + SquidClamAV + ClamAV, and
I'm seeing terrible performance.
It seems there's no SquidClamAV specific mailing list and asking on
generic Squid list did not help much.
Perhaps someone here is using the same thing or knows how to better
tweak the
