Kiril Todorov wrote:
Hello list,
Just a quick warning to the ones still running 0.83.
There seems to be a variation of Bagle which is being catched only by
the devel versions of clamav 0.84rc1 for example.
Could you please submit a sample to me (in a password protected zip file)?
The signatures [Wo
Daniel wrote:
> Kiril Todorov wrote:
>
>> Hello list,
>>
>> Just a quick warning to the ones still running 0.83.
>> There seems to be a variation of Bagle which is being catched only by
>> the devel versions of clamav 0.84rc1 for example.
>>
>> Online scanners showed that only Macaffee, nod32 and
Hello list,
Just a quick warning to the ones still running 0.83.
There seems to be a variation of Bagle which is being catched only by
the devel versions of clamav 0.84rc1 for example.
Online scanners showed that only Macaffee, nod32 and clam catch those
new bagle variations.
So, admins - time t
Kiril Todorov wrote:
Hello list,
Just a quick warning to the ones still running 0.83.
There seems to be a variation of Bagle which is being catched only by
the devel versions of clamav 0.84rc1 for example.
Online scanners showed that only Macaffee, nod32 and clam catch those
new bagle variations.
S
On Thu, 14 Apr 2005, Mark wrote:
> As a rule, I do not bother with 'devel' versions (an anti-virus program
> should, because of its often deeply ingrained use in the mail system,
> always be stable, IMHO). So I must say I am a bit distressed to hear that
> the current stable version (still 0.83) d
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Kiril Todorov
> Sent: donderdag 14 april 2005 23:55
> To: ClamAV users
> Subject: [Clamav-users] Bagle-BB.rar
>
> Hello list,
>
> Just a quick warning to the
