Brian Morrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > "Julian Mehnle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You're trying to kid me, right? I'm not going to be scared away just > > because you wish to take a fundamentalist position that ClamAV should > > _not_ offer an option to ignore social engineering attacks even > > though they are clearly different from technical attacks. > > Except that as many viruses require you to open the attachment that > comes with an email, those are 'social engineering' attacks as you > classify them.
Those viruses are both. I already admitted there is a gray area. > You can easily do what you want provided you are prepared to put the > time and effort into doing it. Meanwhile everyone else will continue to > use the hard work of the ClamAV team to its full benefit. If you're trying to alienate me, good luck. And if you imply I don't appreciate the effort that the creators of ClamAV have invested, you're flat out wrong. I really do. But that won't keep me from making feature requests and constructive suggestions on how to implement them. That's what I have done. _______________________________________________ http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users
