Re: [Clamav-users] ClamAV and VirusTotal

> You are about to be one major rev behind (and are > currently 1 minor rev behind). I would reco that > you and ClamAV people get together and update / > configure for performance Yep, that would be great. For me updating means simply put the new binaries in one machine that releases the whol

Re: [Clamav-users] ClamAV and VirusTotal

At 8:35 PM +0100 3/19/09, Julio Canto wrote: >Sarocet escribió: >> Julio Canto wrote: >>> Paul Whelan escribió: >>> must be the clamwin version then which is a strange 'official channel'. >>> Hi again, >>> You're wrong assuming that, th

Re: [Clamav-users] ClamAV and VirusTotal

Sarocet escribió: > Julio Canto wrote: >> Paul Whelan escribió: >> >>> must be the clamwin version then which is a >>> strange 'official >>> channel'. >>> >> Hi again, >> You're wrong assuming that, therefore you should not accuse us of using >> 'strange official

Re: [Clamav-users] ClamAV and VirusTotal

Julio Canto wrote: > Paul Whelan escribió: > >> must be the clamwin version then which is a >> strange 'official >> channel'. >> > > Hi again, > You're wrong assuming that, therefore you should not accuse us of using > 'strange official channels'. All engines and

Re: [Clamav-users] ClamAV and VirusTotal

On 18 Mar 2009 at 6:55, Julio Canto wrote: > Hi again, > You're wrong assuming that, therefore you should not accuse us of using > 'strange official channels'. All engines and parameters used - including > the ones from ClamAV - at VirusTotal are decided and provided with the > vendors involved.

Re: [Clamav-users] ClamAV and VirusTotal

On 17 Mar 2009 at 21:22, Tomasz Kojm wrote: > out of the box windows support is planned for ClamAV 0.96; in general > we don't distribute any binaries but we may consider doing this for > windows when the support is mature enough Thanks for the update. paul

Re: [Clamav-users] ClamAV and VirusTotal

Paul Whelan escribió: > On 17 Mar 2009 at 13:28, Julio Canto wrote: > >> Steve Basford escribió: Any particular reason why they are using 0.94.1 (and it appears with the most non aggressive settings)? You are not showing off your best side... >>> Having said that... 0.94.2 is avail

Re: [Clamav-users] ClamAV and VirusTotal

On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 17:59:42 - "Paul Whelan" wrote: > If anyone on the clamav team is going to respond to this thread, perhaps > now would be a good time to give an update on the progress of the promised > windows binary support. Hi Paul, out of the box windows support is planned for ClamAV

Re: [Clamav-users] ClamAV and VirusTotal

On 17 Mar 2009 at 13:28, Julio Canto wrote: > Steve Basford escribió: > >> Any particular reason why they are using 0.94.1 (and it appears with > >> the most non aggressive settings)? You are not showing off your best > >> side... > > > > Having said that... 0.94.2 is available for windows: >

Re: [Clamav-users] ClamAV and VirusTotal

Steve Basford escribió: >> Any particular reason why they are using 0.94.1 (and it appears with >> the most non aggressive settings)? You are not showing off your best >> side... > > Hi Tom, > > They use windows based version of software, as far as I can remember. > > Having said that... 0.94.2

Re: [Clamav-users] ClamAV and VirusTotal

> Any particular reason why they are using 0.94.1 (and it appears with > the most non aggressive settings)? You are not showing off your best > side... Hi Tom, They use windows based version of software, as far as I can remember. Having said that... 0.94.2 is available for windows: http://hide

[Clamav-users] ClamAV and VirusTotal

Any particular reason why they are using 0.94.1 (and it appears with the most non aggressive settings)? You are not showing off your best side... Just my2 cents Tom ___ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://w