We usually acknowledge every community signature submission, and even work
with submitters to tweak the signature if needed.
I see that you submitted a few signatures in the past few hours, which we
will acknowledge and review in a few hours. If there are signatures that
you've submitted in the past that we did not acknowledge, they somehow have
fallen through the cracks and I sincerely apologize for that. If you could
be so kind to point them out, we'll let you know what their status is.
Thanks,
- Alain
On Thursday, July 14, 2016, Arnaud Jacques / SecuriteInfo.com <
webmas...@securiteinfo.com> wrote:
> Hello Joel,
>
> > You're right. Nothing I said was negative. We know exactly what
> happens
> > when our testing is done. We don't know in other cases. I didn't say
> > anything about the quality of 3rd party signatures. In fact, the
> quality
> > is so good, that's exactly why we are rolling out the program to protect
> > more people.
>
> I have couple of signatures, handmade, I submited to community-sigs. And I
> have *no news* from them.
> Did they pass false positive tests ? Are they wrong ? Will they be
> published one day ? Do Clamav want
> better detection ratio ? If yes, the minimum is to provide news for
> sigmakers that sumbit their signatures
> (time and efforts) to community-sigs to be included in official Clamav
> databases.
>
>
> > Protecting customers is a good thing. We're always going to try and do
> > that.
>
> We (third parties) do that too ;)
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> Arnaud Jacques
> SecuriteInfo.com
>
> Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/pages/SecuriteInfocom/132872523492286
> Twitter : @SecuriteInfoCom
> ___
> Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
> https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq
>
> http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
>
___
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq
http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
