my comment stating that i currently use backuppc and clamav should be taken
litterally. i did not just implement it based on the suggestion but have
been using clamav to scan backuppc data directories for some time. no
integration or modification but simply cron jobs running clamscan on the
backuppc data directory.
also, reguardless of changed file headers or file extentions, clamav has
found viruses within the compress archives. i guess that may not prove 100%
function but implies function on some level. the other consideration is
that i would assume that the original file header is still within the file
and i dont know the method used by clamav to determine filetype for
extraction.
also, this was a side effect of my normal system configuration as i run
clamav on all my linux machines,
i also exclude a number of directories when doing my backups. i do have more
than may be needed but take a bit of comfort is saving configurations and
various things in the application data folder that can be restored to a new
or reimaged pc. i do exclude cookies because a couple 1000 cookies is a
useless backup and wastes time.
another option may be to scan the files in flight before backuppc compresses
and encode the files. i wonder what the mechanism would be for handling a
'hit' during the scan?? i also run the clamav-daemon but im not sure if
that is scanning files on write or not.
On 10/10/07, Holger Parplies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> dan wrote on 10.10.2007 at 09:46:23 [Re: [BackupPC-users] BackupPC:
> Antivirus suggestion.]:
> > im actually using backuppc with clamav and it in fact does scan withing
> zip
> > and gzip files.
>
> that's quite amazing, presuming you mean what you seem to be implying
> rather
> than what you write. Actually, what *do* you write? What does "using
> BackupPC with clamav" mean? You implemented what was suggested?
>
> Read again:
>
> > On 10/10/07, Adam Goryachev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > I realise that clamscan can decompress zip/bzip2 etc files,
>
> Like you said.
>
> > > but I doubt that it would understand the backuppc format files.
>
> Because they are not plain gzip/bzip2 files.
>
> > > As I understand, they are not a standard gzip of bzip format, there is
> > > additional data pre-pended to the file.
>
> I'm not quite sure where it is, but I'm sure file(1) for one does *not*
> recognize the files for what they are. As far as I remember, a header
> meant
> to make gzip/bzip2 files recognizable is missing in the BackupPC format.
> Any
> file in cpool is known to be compressed anyway, and in the pc/ tree there
> is
> a corresponding backups file with a 'compression level' column. A
> redundant
> header in each compressed file would be a waste of space, would it not?
>
> As two side notes:
> - What do people usually backup? If it's the entire file system, then
> scanning files makes sense. But what if it's only data? My browser
> caches
> are the first thing I tend to exclude from backups. While uniting the
> functions 'backup' and 'virus scan' may save disk accesses, it might
> prove
> to make configuration awkward. Should you backup data you don't really
> want in your backup so it gets scanned? Do you have to keep files you
> for some reason might not want to get scanned out of your backup?
>
> - Do you put files found to be contaminated into the pool (in order to
> save
> yourself the effort of re-scanning them)? How do you recognize them?
> pool, cpool, vpool? :)
>
> Regards,
> Holger
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
