RE: [Clamav-users] Question regarding virus detection

2004-05-21 Thread Jim Maul
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Antony > Stone > Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 5:31 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Clamav-users] Question regarding virus detection > > > On Thursday 20 Ma

Re: [Clamav-users] Question regarding virus detection

2004-05-20 Thread Antony Stone
On Thursday 20 May 2004 9:13 pm, Jim Maul wrote: > Exactly, and after some more playing around, i found that i dont even have > to remove ALL of those lines. I can leave them all in except the first > line which was "-Original Message-" > > If i remove that line, clamscan finds the virus

RE: [Clamav-users] Question regarding virus detection

2004-05-20 Thread Jim Maul
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Antony > Stone > Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 3:23 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Clamav-users] Question regarding virus detection > > > On Thursday 20 May 2004

Re: [Clamav-users] Question regarding virus detection

2004-05-20 Thread Antony Stone
On Thursday 20 May 2004 7:50 pm, Jim Maul wrote: > > > There is something that is causing clamav to not be able to detect this > > > virus after the message has been bounced and now forwarded. > > > > Damaged bounces are not dangerous. Why bother making signatures for them > > when you don't make

Re: [Clamav-users] Question regarding virus detection

2004-05-20 Thread Antony Stone
On Thursday 20 May 2004 7:21 pm, Peter Bonivart wrote: > Jim Maul wrote: > > There is something that is causing clamav to not be able to detect this > > virus after the message has been bounced and now forwarded. > > Damaged bounces are not dangerous. Why bother making signatures for them > when y

RE: [Clamav-users] Question regarding virus detection

2004-05-20 Thread Jim Maul
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Peter > Bonivart > Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 2:22 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Clamav-users] Question regarding virus detection > > > Jim Maul wrote:

Re: [Clamav-users] Question regarding virus detection

2004-05-20 Thread Kevin Spicer
On Thu, 2004-05-20 at 19:21, Peter Bonivart wrote: > Jim Maul wrote: > > There is something that is causing clamav to not be able to detect this > > virus after the message has been bounced and now forwarded. > > Damaged bounces are not dangerous. Why bother making signatures for them > when you

Re: [Clamav-users] Question regarding virus detection

2004-05-20 Thread Peter Bonivart
Jim Maul wrote: There is something that is causing clamav to not be able to detect this virus after the message has been bounced and now forwarded. Damaged bounces are not dangerous. Why bother making signatures for them when you don't make money showing how many viruses you detect? -- /Peter Bon

RE: [Clamav-users] Question regarding virus detection

2004-05-20 Thread Jim Maul
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jim Maul > Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 12:20 PM > To: ClamAV Mailing List > Subject: [Clamav-users] Question regarding virus detection > > > Hello, > > For the first time since installing clamav on our m