On Tuesday 26 October 2004 18:47, Jim Maul shaped the electrons to say:
> Scott Ryan wrote:
>
>
>
> > What are we arguing about here? I just know in my experience that you are
> > seriously shooting yourself in the foot by using clamscan to scan all
> > mails. Trog's suggestion of modifying qmail-
On Oct 26, 2004, at 4:45 AM, Eric Worthy wrote:
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
1290 qscand 15 0 57368 56m 696 R 50.8 5.6 172:29.51 clamdscan
25135 qscand 14 0 57368 56m 696 R 50.2 5.6 187:57.60 clamdscan
4980 qscand 15 0 57368 46m 696 R 50.2 4.6 167:42.45 clamdscan
30917 qsca
James Lick wrote:
Jason Haar wrote:
I am now going to figure out a way that the installation of
Qmail-Scanner
will *ignore* the presense of clamdscan if its actually clamscan -
that is
really too gross to allow to continue.
The ClamAV authors could put a stop to this by making clamdscan and
It wouldn't be necessary to make clamscan and clamdscan the same program
in this case. One could have clamscan check to see if it was invoked as
clamdscan and if so refuse to run. Yes, it should be up to the end user
to not screw up his own system, but this one issue has caused enough
grief h
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 20:07:20 +0800
James Lick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It wouldn't be necessary to make clamscan and clamdscan the same
> program
> in this case. One could have clamscan check to see if it was invoked
> as
> clamdscan and if so refuse to run. Yes, it should be up to the end
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Christoph Cordes wrote:
> ClamAV database updated (2004.10.27 10:58 GMT): daily.cvd
> Version: 556
>
> Submission: 6424-web, 6425-web
> Sender: Gabor Funk, Andrey Melnikov
> Submitted virus name: Bagz[.gen], I-Worm.Bagz.f
> Adde
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Received-SPF: fail (batman.heartsine.com: domain of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] does not designate 12.152.184.25
as permitted sender)
receiver=batman.heartsine.com; client_ip=12.152.184.25;
[EMAIL PROTECTED];
Jim,
I'm getting my list mail directly from aj.catt.com which is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, James Lick wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> >Received-SPF: fail (batman.heartsine.com: domain of
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] does not designate 12.152.184.25
> >as permitted sender)
> >receiver=batman.heartsine.com; client_
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:22:00 +0100 (BST) in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Well at least I know this SPF thing really works.
For some value of works.
--
Brian Morrison
bdm at fenrir dot org dot uk
GnuPG key ID DE32E5C5 - http://wwwkeys.uk.pgp.net/pgpnet/wwwkeys.html
__
Brian Morrison wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:22:00 +0100 (BST) in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well at least I know this SPF thing really works.
For some value of works.
Especially those defined by Spamassassin NOT ;-)
--
_/_/_/_/ _/ _/
_/_/ _/ _/ _/
_/_
Good Morning,
I am looking for some hints as to how to chase down a most annoying
problem on NetBSD-i386. This has spanned several versions of clamav.
At the moment I am running clamav-0.80 on NetBSD1.6.2_STABLE on an
i386 machine. It is working well, but at what seem to be quite random
interval
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 at 15:22:00 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
> Well at least I know this SPF thing really works. !!! It is almost as good
> as ClamAV.
>
But it makes ".forward" hardly useful :-( .
--
Tomasz Papszun SysAdm @ TP S.A. Lodz, Poland | And it's only
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ht
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Tomasz Papszun wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 at 15:22:00 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [...]
> > Well at least I know this SPF thing really works. !!! It is almost as good
> > as ClamAV.
> >
>
> But it makes ".forward" hardly
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 07:54:38 -0700 (PDT) in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Len Burns
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> would appreciate any hints
One hint is not to reply to an existing mailing list thread without
removing the In-Reply-To: and/or References: headers if you wish
to start a new thread
--
Bria
Can someone clarify what
the default directories are now for ClamAV and Mail::ClamAV conf files? I know
that there was some discussion about this but I am not sure it was definitively
answered. My conf files used to reside in /usr/local/etc/ but when I upgraded,
the freshclam daemon stopped
We have one client, who was trying to send some MS Word (doc) file
from Outlook Express.
Message was rejected by Exiscan with ClamAV 0.80:
Wed Oct 27 10:56:19 2004 ->
/var/spool/exim/scan/1CMjao-0004ts-Qg/1CMjao-0004ts-Qg.eml: Worm.SomeFool.P FOUND
Wed Oct 27 10:56:19 2004 ->
/var/spool/exim/sca
I am currently running:
clamd / ClamAV version 0.75.1, clamav-milter version 0.75c
Running freshclam gets me the following message:
WARNING: Your ClamAV installation is OUTDATED - please update immediately
!WARNING: Current functionality level = 2, required = 3
I compiled up 0.80 on a backup serv
I am having a slight problem which appears to have stemmed from swapping from
tcp sockets to unix sockets. Every now and again, and across 5 identical
servers, i get a huge number of clamdscan processes, which prevents qmail
accepting smtp connections. I made the total random assumption that cla
Scott Ryan wanted us to know:
>I am having a slight problem which appears to have stemmed from swapping from
>tcp sockets to unix sockets. Every now and again, and across 5 identical
>servers, i get a huge number of clamdscan processes, which prevents qmail
>accepting smtp connections. I made t
On Wednesday 27 October 2004 21:48, Todd Lyons shaped the electrons to say:
> Scott Ryan wanted us to know:
> >I am having a slight problem which appears to have stemmed from swapping
> > from tcp sockets to unix sockets. Every now and again, and across 5
> > identical servers, i get a huge number
Scott Ryan wanted us to know:
>> How many threads do you have set in clamd.conf?
>Ah. This could very well be the issue. I have threads set to 200, but it could
>be possible that I have more concurrent local and remote smtp connections.
>I will try to increase the number o threads to see if this
On Wednesday 27 October 2004 22:27, Todd Lyons shaped the electrons to say:
> Scott Ryan wanted us to know:
> >> How many threads do you have set in clamd.conf?
> >
> >Ah. This could very well be the issue. I have threads set to 200, but it
> > could be possible that I have more concurrent local an
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Joe Maimon wrote:
> > The ClamAV authors could put a stop to this by making clamdscan and
> > clamscan the same program and then acting differently depending on
> > which name is run. This is similiar to how gzip and gunzip are
This has been brought up before and I am surf
Hi,
I have been received this warning throught cronjob
of ClamAV, in the last days:
ClamAV update process started at Wed Oct 27 05:50:02 2004SECURITY
WARNING: NO SUPPORT FOR DIGITAL SIGNATURESReading CVD header (main.cvd):
OKmain.cvd is up to date (version: 27, sigs: 23982, f-level: 2, b
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004, Alexandre Vidal Pinheiro wrote:
> WARNING: Your ClamAV installation is OUTDATED - please update immediately !
> WARNING: Current functionality level = 2, required = 3
>
> I am a beginner and I use Mailscanner on a Red Hat box, what I should do
> to resolve this?!
Install
SECURITY WARNING: NO SUPPORT FOR DIGITAL SIGNATURES
WARNING: Your ClamAV installation is OUTDATED - please update immediately !
I am a beginner and I use Mailscanner on a Red Hat box, what I should do to
resolve this?!
-
I swear this is on the list about every 3 days.
Install GMP devel for th
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Joe Maimon wrote:
> > The ClamAV authors could put a stop to this by making clamdscan and
> > clamscan the same program and then acting differently depending on
> > which name is run. This is similiar to how gzip and gunzip are
>An action could then be taken to
>alert so
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Joe Maimon wrote:
> > > The ClamAV authors could put a stop to this by making clamdscan and
> > > clamscan the same program and then acting differently depending on
> > > which name is run. This is similiar to how gzip and gunzip are
>
> This ha
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004, Matt wrote:
> There are ways to monitor clamd, and run clamscan if clamd is
> unavailable, without expecting the software itself to do it. Clam is
> fine as it is. The fault tolerance should be built around the software,
> not into it.
>
> Not meaning to be too blunt about thi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Oh, I completely agree, that's my job. But if clam has stability
> issues, that needs to be addressed in clam. clamd->clamscan failover
> code would be short and sweet and the addition to clamdscan would be
> minimal compared to the cost of a complete code audit for cl
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Joe Maimon wrote:
The ClamAV authors could put a stop to this by making clamdscan and
clamscan the same program and then acting differently depending on
which name is run. This is similiar to how gzip and gunzip are
This has been brought up before
Sorry, had it switched on for something else and forgot to
turn it off. My apologies.
Can anyone answer my question below?
Dave
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Tomasz Papszun [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 12:12 PM
> To: Dave Filchak
> Subject: Re: [Cl
James Lick wrote:
The ClamAV authors could put a stop to this by making clamdscan and
clamscan the same program and then acting differently depending on which
name is run.
Why? It's not a problem with clamav but a problem with broken
instructions.
---
Lars Hansson
* Todd Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20041027 22:50]: wrote:
> Scott Ryan wanted us to know:
>
> >I am having a slight problem which appears to have stemmed from swapping from
> >tcp sockets to unix sockets. Every now and again, and across 5 identical
> >servers, i
Hi,
I'm running clamav .7.5.1 and want to update to latest verion. I was able
to compile clamav-0.80rc3 without any problem but somehow I remained
unsuccessful after clamav-0.80rc3. Below was the error received when
attempted
to compile clamav-0.80rc4 and clamav-080:
# make
...
make all-recursiv
Ajaya Sharma wrote:
Hi,
I'm running clamav .7.5.1 and want to update to latest verion. I was able
to compile clamav-0.80rc3 without any problem but somehow I remained
unsuccessful after clamav-0.80rc3. Below was the error received when
attempted
to compile clamav-0.80rc4 and clamav-080:
# make
...
Yes I'm running Solaris 2.6 and I tried with both gcc 3.3.2 and 3.4.2
with no success. I'm just wondering, why I'm not having problem compiling
Clamav-0.8.0rc3 but with the same environment I'm getting errors for
Clamav-0.8.0 and 0.8.0rc4?
Is there any workaround for this?
Regards,
Ajaya Sharma
Thomas Lamy wrote:
Ajaya Sharma wrote:
Hi,
I'm running clamav .7.5.1 and want to update to latest verion. I was
able
to compile clamav-0.80rc3 without any problem but somehow I remained
unsuccessful after clamav-0.80rc3. Below was the error received when
attempted
to compile clamav-0.80rc4 and cla
38 matches
Mail list logo
