Julio Canto wrote:
Phil Ershler wrote:
Every 10 minutes is much to often. There was a thread about this
issue just a while ago. The consensus was 1 to 4 hours and not
exactly on the hour. If everybody ran freshclam every 10 minutes, the
server would croak.
Phil
For the shake of reducing the 'u
Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
Yes. There's nothing that prevent you running freshclam (or whatever
your updater will be) every minute or so.
However, with the default check time of one hour (default for RPM
packages, that is), mirrors already
uses lots of bandwitdh (over 100 GB a month each), so please
Is it possible to use HEAD to reduce load?
-Nigel
--
Nigel Horne. Arranger, Composer, Typesetter.
NJH Music, Barnsley, UK. ICQ#20252325
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.bandsman.co.uk
---
SF.Net email is sponsored by Shop4tech.com-Lowest price o
Nigel Horne wrote:
Is it possible to use HEAD to reduce load?
I believe it already uses RANGE, so traffic wise the load is greatly
reduced.
However, if every user decides to set checks every minutes the
bottleneck will be in
maximum connection. This will not happen if version checks is done vi
Julio Canto wrote:
Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
Yes. There's nothing that prevent you running freshclam (or whatever
your updater will be) every minute or so.
However, with the default check time of one hour (default for RPM
packages, that is), mirrors already
uses lots of bandwitdh (over 100 GB a mon
Lutz Petersen wrote:
>
> > It appears people that report 'memory leaks' are running either
> > Solaris or FreeBSD. It may be that there is a library on those systems
> > that leaks memory.
>
> We administrate nearly 50 Linux Server (mostly debian, some suse, one
> redhat). No solaris and no fr
On Aug 19, 2004, at 9:24 PM, Randall Perry wrote:
on 8/18/04 8:55 AM, Bart Silverstrim at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Best way I've found is to install Fink and install ClamAV using Fink
(Fink Commander). VERY easy to keep updated to the latest ClamAV
using
Fink (although you do need to keep runni
Has anyone managed to get anything working with Clamav using squidguard
and another package to scan traffic as it enters the proxy? I read on
the main site that Viralator supports clamav, but the current download
available, viralator-09pre2.zip, has no provisions for clamscan at all
withi
> Has anyone managed to get anything working with Clamav using squidguard
> and another package to scan traffic as it enters the proxy? I read on
> the main site that Viralator supports clamav, but the current download
> available, viralator-09pre2.zip, has no provisions for clamscan at all
> w
At 02:13 AM 8/20/2004, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
Nigel Horne wrote:
Is it possible to use HEAD to reduce load?
I believe it already uses RANGE, so traffic wise the load is greatly reduced.
Wouldn't it be more efficient to use Etags and/or If-Modified-Since and let
the server issue a "304 Not Modifie
I am using qmail with qmail-scanner 1.20.
Clamav 0.75. When I configure qmail-scanner to run
clam
scan it run great for sometime then the Mail server
will get clogged with clamscan running about 40 or so
processes at the same time. The system is so bogged
down the mail clients timeout. I tried to r
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004, Dale Anderson wrote:
> I am using qmail with qmail-scanner 1.20.
> Clamav 0.75. When I configure qmail-scanner to run
> clam
> scan it run great for sometime then the Mail server
> will get clogged with clamscan running about 40 or so
> processes at the same time. The system i
sudo crontab -e
add at the end
*/10 * * * * /path/to/freshclam --quiet
NO! Once an hour is reasonable, but not 6 times an hour!
I agree, I think a better way is to add a file to the /etc/cron.d
directory with the contents of the file:
# m h dom mon dow user command
11 */2 * * * clamav /path/to/fr
Hello D.J. Fan,
But i have a problem here. Assume that clam updates are published at
6:10 Pm. I check for new updates at 6:05 so the next time i gonna
check is at 7:05 it just means that after 55 mins i got the updates.
And within this 55 minutes thousands and thousands of say ..a worm
which is in
But i have a problem here. Assume that clam updates are published at
6:10 Pm. I check for new updates at 6:05 so the next time i gonna
check is at 7:05 it just means that after 55 mins i got the updates.
And within this 55 minutes thousands and thousands of say ..a worm
which is in wild arrives to
Rajanikanth P wrote the following on 08/21/2004 12:31 AM :
Hello D.J. Fan,
But i have a problem here. Assume that clam updates are published at
6:10 Pm. I check for new updates at 6:05 so the next time i gonna
check is at 7:05 it just means that after 55 mins i got the updates.
And within this 55 m
> Do you realize that no antivirus can provide a signature until :
> - someone has witnessed an infection (or infection attempt),
> - reported it to the virus db maintainers,
> - the signature has been engineered
> - tested (no obvious false positives),
> - then finally publicly released ?
>
> No m
Rajanikanth P wrote:
> Hello D.J. Fan,
>
> But i have a problem here. Assume that clam updates are published at
> 6:10 Pm. I check for new updates at 6:05 so the next time i gonna
> check is at 7:05 it just means that after 55 mins i got the updates.
> And within this 55 minutes thousands and thou
Matthew van Eerde wrote:
> Rajanikanth P wrote:
> > Hello D.J. Fan,
> >
> > But i have a problem here. Assume that clam updates are published at
> > 6:10 Pm. I check for new updates at 6:05 so the next time i gonna
> > check is at 7:05 it just means that after 55 mins i got the updates.
> > And wi
At 03:31 PM 8/20/2004, Rajanikanth P wrote:
But i have a problem here. Assume that clam updates are published at
6:10 Pm. I check for new updates at 6:05 so the next time i gonna
check is at 7:05 it just means that after 55 mins i got the updates.
And within this 55 minutes thousands and thousands
Rajanikanth P wanted us to know:
>Hello D.J. Fan,
>
>But i have a problem here. Assume that clam updates are published at
>6:10 Pm. I check for new updates at 6:05 so the next time i gonna
>check is at 7:05 it just means that after 55 mins i got the updates.
>And within this 55 minutes thousands a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wanted us to know:
>What about companies that are purporting and actually selling appliances
>or applications that claim to stop viruses as they break out based on
>heauristics and/or pattern matching? Are they just blowing smoke?
No, they're just looking for deltas in establish
No matter how often you check for new sigs, you'll always have at least
several hours between a new worm hits the Net and a signature comes to your
local antivirus installation.
IMHO to the question : "What do I do ?" the most logical answer is :
"explain to your users what a new virus is and h
Dear All,
I've a mail server that running clamscan 0.75.1. I found that the
clamscan will take many hours to scan a 5M email with ppt attachement? I've
noticed it that it can take up 10 hrs and the process still running, and use
all the CPU processing, I think something went wrong with the cla
On Sat, 21 Aug 2004, kengheng wrote:
>I've a mail server that running clamscan 0.75.1. I found that the
> clamscan will take many hours to scan a 5M email with ppt attachement? I've
> noticed it that it can take up 10 hrs and the process still running, and use
> all the CPU processing, I think
25 matches
Mail list logo
