Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Jan Pieter Cornet
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 07:24:15PM +0100, Tomasz Kojm wrote:
> > >  Your clamd doesn't support meta-data signatures.
> > So that will be a feature of 0.84 then?
> Yes, it will (already supported in CVS).

Great! I've been "using" meta-data signatures, via procmail, probably since
"sircam" came out in 2001, and it works very good. I'm still catching
mydoom variants using a procmail recipe I wrote in 2003 (much to my
surprise, I might add). (See http://www.xs4all.nl/~johnpc/procmailrc.txt
if you're interested).

But it's also bad, since if a high-profile virus scanner like ClamAV is
going to start matching meta-data, then virus writers are more likely to
notice and start changing it with each virus release, making my procmail
hackery less effective ;)

-- 
#!perl -wpl # mmfppfmpmmpp mmpffm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
$p=3-2*/[^\W\dmpf_]/i;s.[a-z]{$p}.vec($f=join('',$p-1?chr(sub{$_[0]*9+$_[1]*3+
$_[2]}->(map{/p|f/i+/f/i}split//,$&)+97):qw(m p f)[map{((ord$&)%32-1)/$_%3}(9,
3,1)]),5,1)='`'lt$&;$f.eig;# Jan-Pieter Cornet
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Tomasz Kojm
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 22:25:44 +0100
Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:10:57 -0800
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> > At 01:05 PM 3/17/2005, Matt Fretwell wrote:
> > 
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > > that's why this suggested to me a problem with the CVD's.
> > >
> > >  Might one enquire then as to why no one else, upto just, are
> > >  experiencing
> > >this problem? Double check your system before blaming the software.
> > 
> > uh, that's essentially what i just said in that post. it *suggested*
> > a problem with the software, and i misinterpreted the other problem
> > reports  in haste. since nothing's changed on my system, and my disk
> > space, inodes,  ram, permissions, etc are all okay, i jumped to a
> > conclusion. i'm  investigating further. i flew off the handle, which
> > i don't usually do.  i've apologized to Tomas in private email. I
> > apologize here now as well. i  suggested to him in private email
> > that maybe he got up on the wrong side of  the bed with his personal
> > attacks. clearly, i was projecting!
> 
> Because our competences are often unfairly questioned on this list, my
> reactions may be find somewhat ironic. I apologize.
> 
> Attached you can find a patch that (hopefully) will display some
> useful information on the problem.

Don't worry about the invalid signature in my last post. It's
probably a bug in Mailman which breaks signatures in PGP/MIME emails
with attachments.

-- 
   oo. Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  (\/)\. http://www.ClamAV.net/gpg/tkojm.gpg
 \..._ 0DCA5A08407D5288279DB43454822DC8985A444B
   //\   /\  Thu Mar 17 22:26:58 CET 2005


pgpxZG1EpEXyn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Tomasz Kojm
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:10:57 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> At 01:05 PM 3/17/2005, Matt Fretwell wrote:
> 
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > that's why this suggested to me a problem with the CVD's.
> >
> >  Might one enquire then as to why no one else, upto just, are
> >  experiencing
> >this problem? Double check your system before blaming the software.
> 
> uh, that's essentially what i just said in that post. it *suggested* a
> problem with the software, and i misinterpreted the other problem
> reports  in haste. since nothing's changed on my system, and my disk
> space, inodes,  ram, permissions, etc are all okay, i jumped to a
> conclusion. i'm  investigating further. i flew off the handle, which i
> don't usually do.  i've apologized to Tomas in private email. I
> apologize here now as well. i  suggested to him in private email that
> maybe he got up on the wrong side of  the bed with his personal
> attacks. clearly, i was projecting!

Because our competences are often unfairly questioned on this list, my
reactions may be find somewhat ironic. I apologize.

Attached you can find a patch that (hopefully) will display some useful
information on the problem.

-- 
   oo. Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  (\/)\. http://www.ClamAV.net/gpg/tkojm.gpg
 \..._ 0DCA5A08407D5288279DB43454822DC8985A444B
   //\   /\  Thu Mar 17 22:25:10 CET 2005


pgpSrk1kSxclU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread clamav
At 01:05 PM 3/17/2005, Matt Fretwell wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> that's why this suggested to me a problem with the CVD's.
 Might one enquire then as to why no one else, upto just, are experiencing
this problem? Double check your system before blaming the software.
uh, that's essentially what i just said in that post. it *suggested* a 
problem with the software, and i misinterpreted the other problem reports 
in haste. since nothing's changed on my system, and my disk space, inodes, 
ram, permissions, etc are all okay, i jumped to a conclusion. i'm 
investigating further. i flew off the handle, which i don't usually do. 
i've apologized to Tomas in private email. I apologize here now as well. i 
suggested to him in private email that maybe he got up on the wrong side of 
the bed with his personal attacks. clearly, i was projecting!

Paul Theodoropoulos
http://www.anastrophe.com
http://www.smileglobal.com
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Matt Fretwell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> that's why this suggested to me a problem with the CVD's.

 Might one enquire then as to why no one else, upto just, are experiencing
this problem? Double check your system before blaming the software.


Matt
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread clamav
At 12:48 PM 3/17/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you've broken something in the distributed CVD's. i've seen other reports 
of this problem today.
correction, the other reports are regarding changes to the CVD format 
apparently, but don't match what i'm experiencing. as i said, plenty of 
disk, plenty of inodes, no memory shortage. that's why this suggested to me 
a problem with the CVD's.


Paul Theodoropoulos
http://www.anastrophe.com
http://www.smileglobal.com
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Tomasz Kojm
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:48:10 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> got any other brilliant suggestions, einstein?

I commiserate with your users.

-- 
   oo. Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  (\/)\. http://www.ClamAV.net/gpg/tkojm.gpg
 \..._ 0DCA5A08407D5288279DB43454822DC8985A444B
   //\   /\  Thu Mar 17 21:49:19 CET 2005


pgpmmwljB3veP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread clamav
> >At 10:24 AM 3/17/2005, Tomasz Kojm wrote:
> > >Yes, it will (already supported in CVS).
>
> this is ridiculous. my clamd system is now broken due to these changes
> that are being propogated. i'm running the current .83 release. you
> should at least support your current RELEASE version for all clients
> out there before propogating changes to the db that are incompatible
> with it!!
Buy a book on UNIX administering, kiddy.
wow, aren't we the pompous one.
> LibClamAV Error: Wrote 0 instead of 512
> (/var/tmp//clamav-d8cafc6d942bbe89/main.db).
> LibClamAV Error: cli_cvdload(): Can't unpack CVD file.
> LibClamAV Error: Can't load /usr/local/share/clamav/main.cvd: CVD
> extraction failure
> ERROR: CVD extraction failure
> Mar 17 12:25:32 klaatu clamd[9258]: [ID 495146 local6.error] CVD
> extraction failure
...and start from a chapter on /tmp cleaning.
you've broken something in the distributed CVD's. i've seen other reports 
of this problem today. my clamd was working just fine, and i've plenty of 
disk space, swap space, and actual ram.

got any other brilliant suggestions, einstein?
Paul Theodoropoulos
http://www.anastrophe.com
http://www.smileglobal.com
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Todd Lyons
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wanted us to know:

>>>Yes, it will (already supported in CVS).
>this is ridiculous. my clamd system is now broken due to these changes that
>are being propogated. i'm running the current .83 release. you should at
>S60clamd start
>LibClamAV Error: Wrote 0 instead of 512
>(/var/tmp//clamav-d8cafc6d942bbe89/main.db).
>LibClamAV Error: cli_cvdload(): Can't unpack CVD file.
>LibClamAV Error: Can't load /usr/local/share/clamav/main.cvd: CVD
>extraction failure
>ERROR: CVD extraction failure
>Mar 17 12:25:32 klaatu clamd[9258]: [ID 495146 local6.error] CVD extraction
>failure

I get no errors on my system running a duplicate configuration.  Figure
out why clam cannot write to /var/tmp and you'll most likely solve your
problem.  See if df -i and df -h return anything useful.
-- 
Regards...  Todd
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary 
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.   --Benjamin Franklin
Linux kernel 2.6.8.1-12mdkenterprise   1 user,  load average: 0.24, 0.07, 0.02
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Tomasz Kojm
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:40:43 +0100
Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:33:42 -0800
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> > >At 10:24 AM 3/17/2005, Tomasz Kojm wrote:
> > > >Yes, it will (already supported in CVS).
> > 
> > this is ridiculous. my clamd system is now broken due to these
> > changes that are being propogated. i'm running the current .83
> > release. you should at least support your current RELEASE version
> > for all clients out there before propogating changes to the db that
> > are incompatible with it!!
> 
> Buy a book on UNIX administering, kiddy.
> 
> > LibClamAV Error: Wrote 0 instead of 512
> > (/var/tmp//clamav-d8cafc6d942bbe89/main.db).
> > LibClamAV Error: cli_cvdload(): Can't unpack CVD file.
> > LibClamAV Error: Can't load /usr/local/share/clamav/main.cvd: CVD
> > extraction failure
> > ERROR: CVD extraction failure
> > Mar 17 12:25:32 klaatu clamd[9258]: [ID 495146 local6.error] CVD
> > extraction failure
> 
> ...and start from a chapter on /tmp cleaning.

and /var/tmp

-- 
   oo. Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  (\/)\. http://www.ClamAV.net/gpg/tkojm.gpg
 \..._ 0DCA5A08407D5288279DB43454822DC8985A444B
   //\   /\  Thu Mar 17 21:42:30 CET 2005


pgpBebl55LSyu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Tomasz Kojm
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:33:42 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> >At 10:24 AM 3/17/2005, Tomasz Kojm wrote:
> > >Yes, it will (already supported in CVS).
> 
> this is ridiculous. my clamd system is now broken due to these changes
> that are being propogated. i'm running the current .83 release. you
> should at least support your current RELEASE version for all clients
> out there before propogating changes to the db that are incompatible
> with it!!

Buy a book on UNIX administering, kiddy.

> LibClamAV Error: Wrote 0 instead of 512
> (/var/tmp//clamav-d8cafc6d942bbe89/main.db).
> LibClamAV Error: cli_cvdload(): Can't unpack CVD file.
> LibClamAV Error: Can't load /usr/local/share/clamav/main.cvd: CVD
> extraction failure
> ERROR: CVD extraction failure
> Mar 17 12:25:32 klaatu clamd[9258]: [ID 495146 local6.error] CVD
> extraction failure

...and start from a chapter on /tmp cleaning.

> Paul Theodoropoulos
> http://www.anastrophe.com
> http://www.smileglobal.com

-- 
   oo. Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  (\/)\. http://www.ClamAV.net/gpg/tkojm.gpg
 \..._ 0DCA5A08407D5288279DB43454822DC8985A444B
   //\   /\  Thu Mar 17 21:35:48 CET 2005


pgpfqOWEgMwYS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread clamav

At 10:24 AM 3/17/2005, Tomasz Kojm wrote:
>Yes, it will (already supported in CVS).
this is ridiculous. my clamd system is now broken due to these changes that
are being propogated. i'm running the current .83 release. you should at
least support your current RELEASE version for all clients out there before
propogating changes to the db that are incompatible with it!!
S60clamd start
LibClamAV Error: Wrote 0 instead of 512
(/var/tmp//clamav-d8cafc6d942bbe89/main.db).
LibClamAV Error: cli_cvdload(): Can't unpack CVD file.
LibClamAV Error: Can't load /usr/local/share/clamav/main.cvd: CVD
extraction failure
ERROR: CVD extraction failure
Mar 17 12:25:32 klaatu clamd[9258]: [ID 495146 local6.error] CVD extraction
failure

Paul Theodoropoulos
http://www.anastrophe.com
http://www.smileglobal.com
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Tomasz Kojm
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:29:31 -0800 (PST)
"Dennis Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> It appears that quite a lot is happening in the CVS now - is .84 near?
> I'm uncomfortable dropping CVS code into production as many are.

Yes, 0.84rc1 is relatively near.

-- 
   oo. Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  (\/)\. http://www.ClamAV.net/gpg/tkojm.gpg
 \..._ 0DCA5A08407D5288279DB43454822DC8985A444B
   //\   /\  Thu Mar 17 20:41:44 CET 2005


pgpmS3gJPb0yc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Dennis Peterson
Tomasz Kojm said:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:21:04 +
> Brian Morrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 19:15:44 +0100 in
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >  > So, why the difference between what freshclam thinks the number
>> >  > of signatures is, and what clamd thinks?
>> >
>> >  Your clamd doesn't support meta-data signatures.
>>
>> So that will be a feature of 0.84 then?
>
> Yes, it will (already supported in CVS).

It appears that quite a lot is happening in the CVS now - is .84 near? I'm
uncomfortable dropping CVS code into production as many are.

dp
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Guillaume Arcas
Tomasz Kojm a écrit :

> Your clamd doesn't support meta-data signatures.

What is a meta-date signature ?

BTW, what's in the .zmd file ? Patterns for password-protected zip file
detection ?

Regards,

-- 
Guillaume Arcas


J'ai personnellement connu un canard qui avait du genie.
Alphonse Allais

___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Brian Morrison
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 19:15:44 +0100 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>  Your clamd doesn't support meta-data signatures.

Should the daily.cvd not be showing as f-level: 5 if a new format has
been added?

-- 

Brian Morrison

bdm at fenrir dot org dot uk

GnuPG key ID DE32E5C5 - http://wwwkeys.uk.pgp.net/pgpnet/wwwkeys.html
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Tomasz Kojm
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:21:04 +
Brian Morrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 19:15:44 +0100 in
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> 
> >  > So, why the difference between what freshclam thinks the number
> >  > of signatures is, and what clamd thinks?
> > 
> >  Your clamd doesn't support meta-data signatures.
> 
> So that will be a feature of 0.84 then?

Yes, it will (already supported in CVS).

-- 
   oo. Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  (\/)\. http://www.ClamAV.net/gpg/tkojm.gpg
 \..._ 0DCA5A08407D5288279DB43454822DC8985A444B
   //\   /\  Thu Mar 17 19:23:10 CET 2005


pgpUWB7ORBBfQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Brian Morrison
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 19:15:44 +0100 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>  > So, why the difference between what freshclam thinks the number of
>  > signatures is, and what clamd thinks?
> 
>  Your clamd doesn't support meta-data signatures.

So that will be a feature of 0.84 then?

-- 

Brian Morrison

bdm at fenrir dot org dot uk

GnuPG key ID DE32E5C5 - http://wwwkeys.uk.pgp.net/pgpnet/wwwkeys.html
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Ken Jones

> Received signal 14, wake up
> ClamAV update process started at Thu Mar 17 17:44:40 2005
> main.cvd is up to date (version: 30, sigs: 31086, f-level: 4,
> builder: tkojm)
> daily.cvd updated (version: 767, sigs: 562, f-level: 4, builder: diego)
> Database updated (31648 signatures) from
> db.gb.clamav.net(IP:68.142.86.21)
> Clamd successfully notified about the update.
> --
> Reading databases from /var/lib/clamav
> Database correctly reloaded (31647 viruses)
>
> So, why the difference between what freshclam thinks the number of
> signatures is, and what clamd thinks?

One started counting at 0 and the other at 1 ??

Main.cvd  - 31086
Daily.cvd -   562
   --
31648 Total

Just a guess
>
> --
>
> Brian Morrison
>
> bdm at fenrir dot org dot uk
>
> GnuPG key ID DE32E5C5 - http://wwwkeys.uk.pgp.net/pgpnet/wwwkeys.html
> ___
> http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
>


-- 
Ken Jones

___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html


Re: [Clamav-users] Latest virusdb update - mismatched signature count?

2005-03-17 Thread Tomasz Kojm
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:06:00 +
Brian Morrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Received signal 14, wake up 
> ClamAV update process started at Thu Mar 17 17:44:40 2005
> main.cvd is up to date (version: 30, sigs: 31086, f-level: 4,
> builder: tkojm)
> daily.cvd updated (version: 767, sigs: 562, f-level: 4, builder:
> diego) Database updated (31648 signatures) from
> db.gb.clamav.net(IP:68.142.86.21)
> Clamd successfully notified about the update.
> --
> Reading databases from /var/lib/clamav
> Database correctly reloaded (31647 viruses) 
> 
> So, why the difference between what freshclam thinks the number of
> signatures is, and what clamd thinks?

Your clamd doesn't support meta-data signatures.

-- 
   oo. Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  (\/)\. http://www.ClamAV.net/gpg/tkojm.gpg
 \..._ 0DCA5A08407D5288279DB43454822DC8985A444B
   //\   /\  Thu Mar 17 19:15:18 CET 2005


pgphM2xPnc0JM.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html