> But it is the the jpeg that contains the virus, so changing the jpeg will
> remove
> the virus.
If so, why does clamscan report "OK" when scanning?
z.badjpeg: OK
z.goodjpeg: Worm.Bagle.AC FOUND
Both of these contain the Bagle attachment (Readme.cpl), but it is only
found after replacing the b
On Monday 21 Mar 2005 10:16, you wrote:
> Again; why does not clamscan find the virus when a mail file contains a
> bad jpeg? I doubt this is by design...
But it is the the jpeg that contains the virus, so changing the jpeg will remove
the virus.
> //D
>
--
Nigel Horne. Arranger, Composer, Ty
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Nigel Horne wrote:
> Subject: Re: [Clamav-users] Attachment not identified as attachment/bad
> jpeg
>
> Background - Daniel has emailed the files to me ]
>
> > > Send me a copy of the mail which is incorrectly scanned and I'll look
> &g
Background - Daniel has emailed the files to me ]
On Monday 21 Mar 2005 09:43, you wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Nigel Horne wrote:
>
> > Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 08:47:12 +
> > From: Nigel Horne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Re: [Clamav-users] Attachment no
Send me a copy of the mail which is incorrectly scanned and I'll look into it.
--
Nigel Horne. Arranger, Composer, Typesetter.
NJH Music, Barnsley, UK. ICQ#20252325
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.bandsman.co.uk
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-us
> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 16:31:52 +0100
> From: Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[...snip...]
> > In short: 1) virus attachment IS NOT identified when the jpeg
> > attachment
> > is present
> > 2) virus attachment IS identified if same mail w/o jpeg is
> > scanned
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:02:11 +0100 (MET)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello,
>
> this is my first post here so be gentle...
>
> Clamscan does not find some attachments in some types of mail.
> Most attachments are, but not all. This have me somewhat concerned,
> since the receiving email client wi
Hello,
this is my first post here so be gentle...
Clamscan does not find some attachments in some types of mail.
Most attachments are, but not all. This have me somewhat concerned,
since the receiving email client will not be as ignorant :(
Seems like it is related to how a buggy(?), attached jp
