Or is it based on older versions, like most of the items contained in those documents? I suspect that the ClamWin developers are the only ones that can tell us what has been or will be done about it.
-Al- On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 03:03 AM, Groach wrote: > > So what are we saying? > > Clamwin people need to be made aware of this? Or ARE aware of this and > complicit? Or people are just paranoid and its nothing more than bad > implementation/software but otherwise causes no problems? Or simpy dont > care? (I hope its not the last 2 because they simply dont put effort into > the ports and indeed only do so if there is a noticeable benefit in > functionality). > > On 09/03/2017 08:45, Steve Basford wrote: >> Just for those who hasn't spotted ClamWin in the leak: >> >> https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_27262995.html >> >> Clam Portable >> http://portableapps.com/apps/security/clamwin_portable >> >> ClamWin: >> http://www.clamwin.com/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ clamav-users mailing list clamav-users@lists.clamav.net http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
