Op Tue, 5 Jul 2016 15:42:06 -0700 schreef "Johan Andersson" <j...@passagen.se>:
> After an Microsoft security essentials scan the foloewing where > listede as thereats: > file:D:\gnewsense\gnewsense-three\gnewsense\pool\main\d\dbacl\dbacl_1.12 > .orig.tar.gz->(GZip)->dbacl-1.12/src/tests/sample.spam-10->(SCRIPT0000) > file:D:\gnewsense\gnewsense-three\gnewsense\pool\main\p\pymilter-milters > \pymilter-milters_0.8.13.orig.tar.gz->(GZip)->pymilter-milters-0.8.13/te > st/honey->(IframeRefI) > file:D:\gnewsense\gnewsense-three\gnewsense\pool\main\p\pymilter-milters > \python-milter-docs_0.8.13-5_all.deb->data.tar.gz->(GZip)->./usr/share/d > oc/python-milter-docs/examples/honey->(IframeRefI) Thanks for the report. It seems to point specifically to test and example files. The packages they belong to are designed to be able to detect spam. So in fact they help to protect against threats instead of being threats themselves and you're right to recognize them as false positives. However, I don't find this reason enough to patch those packages. Tests and documentation are meant to improve the software, so it's good that we have them. Perhaps if MS Security Essentials were free software we would see that it also has a lot of test files in its source code and then it would mark its own source files as threats. I think for such cases it makes more sense to whitelist the files in the tool then to patch the source. I hope this addresses your concern. _______________________________________________ gNewSense-users mailing list gNewSense-users@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-users