Re: clamscan and blackhole errors was [Clamav-users] EICAR signature update: second attempt

2005-02-23 Thread Matt Fretwell
ahellary wrote: > ok all renamed this thread > > i have with help deduced that clamscan is ok its self so it must be the > way arguments are passed via blackhole-1.0.9 > > what i need to know has there been any change since clam v .80 to the > new .83 as to the way the args are passed to clamsca

clamscan and blackhole errors was [Clamav-users] EICAR signature update: second attempt

2005-02-23 Thread ahellary
ok all renamed this thread i have with help deduced that clamscan is ok its self so it must be the way arguments are passed via blackhole-1.0.9 what i need to know has there been any change since clam v .80 to the new .83 as to the way the args are passed to clamscan Thanks Tony

Re: [Clamav-users] EICAR signature update: second attempt

2005-02-23 Thread ahellary
That will tell us whether your problem is with clamav, or with blackhole. -- Daniel J McDonald, CCIE # 2495, CNX Austin Energy Daniel have just tried as you said both .82 and .83 detected the test file so i need to dig a bit deeper thanks for you help Tony _

Re: [Clamav-users] EICAR signature update: second attempt

2005-02-23 Thread Daniel J McDonald
On Wed, 2005-02-23 at 18:12 +, ahellary wrote: > > > > Detect a virus in a mail passed through the MTA, or a virus saved to the > > filesystem? > a virus from an email ... the server i question is a mail server it does > nothing but mail Have you tested checking a virus in the file system?

Re: [Clamav-users] EICAR signature update: second attempt

2005-02-23 Thread ahellary
Detect a virus in a mail passed through the MTA, or a virus saved to the filesystem? Matt Matt a virus from an email ... the server i question is a mail server it does nothing but mail Tony ___ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html

Re: [Clamav-users] EICAR signature update: second attempt

2005-02-23 Thread ahellary
its slackware I've got 0.83 running OK on slackware... but I had to upgrade zlib... do you get any make errors? Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.964.4554 x902 Mathew i get no make errors at all Tony ___ http://lurker.clamav.net/l

Re: [Clamav-users] EICAR signature update: second attempt

2005-02-23 Thread Matt Fretwell
ahellary wrote: > i STILL cannont get either version .81 or .82 to detect any virus i seem > to be stuck at ver .80i have posed previously with details of my set > up but here it is again > > its slackware with a 2.2.x kernel , qmail , black hole and spamassin > version .80 works fine b

RE: [Clamav-users] EICAR signature update: second attempt

2005-02-23 Thread Matthew.van.Eerde
ahellary wrote: > i STILL cannont get either version .81 or .82 to detect any virus Try 0.83? > its slackware I've got 0.83 running OK on slackware... but I had to upgrade zlib... do you get any make errors? Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.964.4554 x902 Hispanic Business I

Re: [Clamav-users] EICAR signature update: second attempt

2005-02-23 Thread ahellary
Tomasz i STILL cannont get either version .81 or .82 to detect any virus i seem to be stuck at ver .80i have posed previously with details of my set up but here it is again its slackware with a 2.2.x kernel , qmail , black hole and spamassin version .80 works fine but numerous attempts

Re: [Clamav-users] EICAR signature update: second attempt

2005-02-23 Thread Tomasz Kojm
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 00:32:10 -0600 (CST) Damian Menscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Tomasz Kojm wrote: > > > The signature will be updated on Monday (to better meet the official > > specification). All clamdwatch users should upgrade to the latest > > version as soon as pos

Re: [Clamav-users] EICAR signature update: second attempt

2005-02-22 Thread Damian Menscher
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Tomasz Kojm wrote: The signature will be updated on Monday (to better meet the official specification). All clamdwatch users should upgrade to the latest version as soon as possible to avoid problems similar to those from 2004. What's the status of this? I wrote a clmilter_wat

Re: [Clamav-users] EICAR signature update: second attempt

2005-02-18 Thread Tomasz Kojm
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 15:45:54 -0600 (CST) Damian Menscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Tomasz Kojm wrote: > > > The signature will be updated on Monday (to better meet the official > > specification). All clamdwatch users should upgrade to the latest > > version as soon as pos

Re: [Clamav-users] EICAR signature update: second attempt

2005-02-18 Thread Des Keane
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 15:45:54 -0600 (CST), Damian Menscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Latest version of clamav, or clamdwatch? Latest version of clamdwatch (0.7.1, as distributed with clamav 0.83). > Why is the most recent version required (I'm assuming some new > functionality is required, but

Re: [Clamav-users] EICAR signature update: second attempt

2005-02-18 Thread Damian Menscher
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Tomasz Kojm wrote: The signature will be updated on Monday (to better meet the official specification). All clamdwatch users should upgrade to the latest version as soon as possible to avoid problems similar to those from 2004. Latest version of clamav, or clamdwatch? Why is th

[Clamav-users] EICAR signature update: second attempt

2005-02-18 Thread Tomasz Kojm
The signature will be updated on Monday (to better meet the official specification). All clamdwatch users should upgrade to the latest version as soon as possible to avoid problems similar to those from 2004. -- oo. Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (\/)\. http: