> Seems reasonable. But then a checkbox for "false positives" should be added.
>
It has already been there :-) .
--
Tomasz Papszun SysAdm @ TP S.A. Lodz, Poland | And it's only
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lodz.tpsa.pl/ | ones and zeros.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ClamAV.net/ A G
Lucas Albers wrote:
Thought of a great idea.
Make it so the virus submittal page will scan the virus with clamscan.
If it already detects it teh virus, it will reject it.
Unless the user explicitly tell web page to accept it a virus that has
been detected with clamscan.
That should reduce the numbe
On Wednesday 18 February 2004 10:06 pm, Lucas Albers wrote:
> Thought of a great idea.
> Make it so the virus submittal page will scan the virus with clamscan.
> If it already detects it teh virus, it will reject it.
Er, this is what it already does.
> Unless the user explicitly tell web page to
Thought of a great idea.
Make it so the virus submittal page will scan the virus with clamscan.
If it already detects it teh virus, it will reject it.
Unless the user explicitly tell web page to accept it a virus that has
been detected with clamscan.
That should reduce the number of redundant subm
