On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Jim Maul wrote:
Is it causing you (or anyone for that matter) a problem by clamav catching some phishing attempts as opposed to spamassassin catching them? Whats really the issue here? You just dont believe clamav is the right tool for that job, but is there REALLY a problem? I doubt it.
Virus signatures typically rely on some binary attachment. Phishing signatures rely on plaintext. Therefore the probability of a false positive goes way up. For those who drop/reject viruses, this is an unacceptable (and unnecessary) risk.
This is probably the best (and possibly only) reason i have heard to not detect them. In a case where some people want the option and others dont, perhaps a way to turn off detection of these messages if you so choose is the best option.
If my car is broken usually I take it to a mechanic. But if a friend of mine who happens to be a plumber can fix it also, does it really matter if I bring it to him instead? No.
Great analogy. What if you have two friends, one who happens to be a plumber, and one who happens to be a mechanic? If it's free either way, who would you take it to? Me, I'd take it to the mechanic. Sure, the plumber can probably fix it. But what if his solution to that fuel-line clog is a gallon of Drano? Is it really worth the risk?
What if the plumber and the mechanic work on it together? ;)
-Jim _______________________________________________ http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users
