Diego d'Ambra wrote:
ClamAV databases updated (04-mar-2004 13:11 GMT): daily.cvd, viruses.db2
version: 165
Submission: n/a
Sender: Diego d'Ambra
Virus name: Worm.Bagle.Gen-zippwd
Notes: Generic signature to detect password-protected Bagle zip files
Notes: Signature by Trog
Added: Yes
Does this mea
My most humble apologies. I accidentally sent a post I meant for
clamav-users to clamav-virusdb.
This was purely by accident.
---
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, Presi
I'm sure this idea has been knocked around before, but with the way
MyDoom, Bagle (beagle), and NeySky have gone through so many versions
with minor variations of their email message, has anyone thougth about
adding bayes style checking?
It wouldn't be a definate positive, but instead a this is
Mike Fedyk wrote:
Tim B wrote:
I'm sure this idea has been knocked around before, but with the way
MyDoom, Bagle (beagle), and NeySky have gone through so many versions
with minor variations of their email message, has anyone thougth about
adding bayes style checking?
It wouldn&#
Ok,
I see now that .68 is out, and .70rc is out as well.
Right now I'm actually relying on the fact that clamscan coredumps on
some rar files and exits with a nice exit code as it crashes which seems
to have prevented some of the passing through of the new rar encrypted
viruses.
Would it poss
anyone have any info on JS.Spam.Scramble.A? I'm seeing a lot of it, and
am curious as to what it does.
Tim
---
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenTo
I can't seem to find a definate yes or no anywhere, so I figured I'd ask
here.
When using clamd, and freshclam, and new virus list comes out, do I have
to restart or reload clamd to recognize the new definitions or does it
do it automatically?
russ wrote:
On Tue, 2004-03-30 at 20:28, Tim B wrote:
When using clamd, and freshclam, and new virus list comes out, do I have
to restart or reload clamd to recognize the new definitions or does it
do it automatically?
It does it automatically.
Thanks
I've done a sigtool -l | grep -i "atak" to see if there are sigs for the
massmailing atak worm as reported by SARC/Sophos/McAfee ect ect. And do
not see it detected by ClamAV. So then I checked the Alias database at
rainingfrogs.co.uk and again didn't see it being cross referenced to a
clamav
Scott Call wrote:
On Mon, 9 Aug 2004, Steven Stern wrote:
As usual, ClamAV's name came out too soon The standard naming
seems to be
Not to beat a dead horse, but I'd rather have an ill-named signature 3-5
hours before the "big guys" name it, than wait for the name to put in
the signature :)
Luca Gibelli wrote:
Dear ClamAV users,
we are seeing a lot of useless traffic on our mirror servers.
It looks like there are many broken freshclam clients still running.
Once again, we urge you to upgrade to ClamAV 0.80 and take advantage of
the new DNSDatabaseInfo option, which allows to check for
Ralf Bosz wrote:
Luca,
# freshclam -v
Current working dir is /var/lib/clamav
Max retries == 3
ClamAV update process started at Mon Nov 1 13:24:56 2004
TTL: 900
main.cvd version from DNS: 27
Software version from DNS: 0.80
main.cvd is up to date (version: 27, sigs: 23982, f-level: 2, builder: tome
david thompson wrote:
I then download avg - the free windows virus scanner. install it and
get the latest definitions. I scan in windows using avg. Nothing found.
This is not the first time this has happened. I scanned a friends hard
drive with windowsxp on it, and clamscan found 'lion' coin
13 matches
Mail list logo
