I have installed ClamAv and amavisd-new to work with Postfix. They are mostly
working except that when I start amavisd I get the following message in
maillog:
Found secondary av scanner Clam Antivirus - clamscan
at /usr/local/bin/clamscan
When a message is sent to amavisd for scanning I get th
0.7rc is doing the same thing for me, even with --enable-bigstack, it work
2-3 minutes then dies :
Thu Mar 18 17:51:04 2004 ->
/var/amavis/amavisd_tmp/amavis-20040318T175049-02778/parts/email.txt: OK
Thu Mar 18 17:51:05 2004 ->
/var/amavis/amavisd_tmp/amavis-20040318T175042-02759/parts/part-1:
Try to list your perl packages to know exactly what is installed :
shell>rpm -qa | grep perl
If perl-iostringy && perl-mailtools are "installed", you should --force the
install of perl-MIME-tools wich is THE package you need for Clam. If it
fails, deinstall them and install them again. If it fail
Jim Maul wrote:
Dropping isn't good or bad, however if you're not careful it could come
around and bite you on the back side.
I notify the 'recipient' in the event the email in question was expected
(part of a project, family / business correspondence etc).
Otherwise they could be wondering where
> Dropping isn't good or bad, however if you're not careful it could come
> around and bite you on the back side.
>
> I notify the 'recipient' in the event the email in question was expected
> (part of a project, family / business correspondence etc).
>
> Otherwise they could be wondering where the
On Sat, 20 Mar 2004, Sergey wrote:
> Hello.
>
> What do you think about move all configs for Clam AV to
> /etc/clamav by default (and I think, what file config
> for clamav-milter will be useful too: the big config
> string in /etc/sysconfig is bad perceptible I think..) ?
This is how I configu
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, Antony Stone wrote:
> On Friday 19 March 2004 9:21 pm, Robert Schmidt wrote:
>
> > We bounce messages that have viruses.
>
> That sounds like a terrible idea.
Worse. It's a horrible idea.
Justin
---
This SF.Net email
On Sun, 2004-03-21 at 17:40, Damian Menscher wrote:
> There are three cases to consider:
>
> 1 - virus from infected machine
> 2 - virus relayed through another server
> 3 - false positive
>
> Everyone agrees we don't want to generate a notification for case 1.
> Everyone agrees we *do* want to
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, jef moskot wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, Robert Schmidt wrote:
>
> > It is bad practice to drop messages in the round file and not tell
> > anyone about it.
>
> Not if the message was not sent out by a human, but by an automatic system
> designed to cause problems (which get ex
On Sunday 21 March 2004 9:04 pm, Erik Corry wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 08:43:19PM +, Antony Stone wrote:
> > On Sunday 21 March 2004 6:37 pm, Erik Corry wrote:
> > > You need to distinguish between Worms and Viruses. Worms are just
> > > propagating themselves. There's never any harm i
On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 08:43:19PM +, Antony Stone wrote:
> On Sunday 21 March 2004 6:37 pm, Erik Corry wrote:
>
> > You need to distinguish between Worms and Viruses. Worms are just
> > propagating themselves. There's never any harm in dropping a worm
> > since they are not part of a projec
On Sunday 21 March 2004 8:43 pm, Antony Stone wrote:
> On Sunday 21 March 2004 6:37 pm, Erik Corry wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 01:13:51PM -0500, Bit Fuzzy wrote:
> > > I notify the 'recipient' in the event the email in question was
> > > expected (part of a project, family / business corres
On Sunday 21 March 2004 6:37 pm, Erik Corry wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 01:13:51PM -0500, Bit Fuzzy wrote:
> > I notify the 'recipient' in the event the email in question was expected
> > (part of a project, family / business correspondence etc).
>
> You need to distinguish between Worms and
On 2004-03-21, Bit Fuzzy wrote:
>This is true
Please don't top-post. Quoting whole mail to add your three words wastes
so much bandwidth.
s.
--
(0> Jakub Jankowski [url]: s.atn.pl "Nawet w Krainie Czarow
//\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [rlu]: 174516 latwiej jest spotkac
V_/_ [EMAIL PROTECTED
This is true
- Original Message -
From: "jef moskot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 2:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Clamav-users] Postmaster bounces and such.
> On Sun, 21 Mar 2004, Bit Fuzzy wrote:
> > I notify the 'recipient' in the event the email in q
On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 01:13:51PM -0500, Bit Fuzzy wrote:
> I notify the 'recipient' in the event the email in question was expected
> (part of a project, family / business correspondence etc).
You need to distinguish between Worms and Viruses. Worms are just
propagating themselves. There's nev
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004, Bit Fuzzy wrote:
> I notify the 'recipient' in the event the email in question was expected
> (part of a project, family / business correspondence etc).
Again, you can safely dump the message if it's an automatically generated
worm. I can see some kind of notification for a W
If anything, i'd say it leaked less...course, i jumped from .65 to .7.
On Sunday 21 March 2004 12:38 pm, Didi Rieder wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> is it possible that there is a memory leak in clamd since version 0.68-1.
> I'm running 0.68-1 on several Solaris 8 an 9 boxes. After starting clamd it
> uses a
Hi all,
is it possible that there is a memory leak in clamd since version 0.68-1.
I'm running 0.68-1 on several Solaris 8 an 9 boxes. After starting clamd it
uses about 14Mb of memory and just 3 days later it's already about 80Mb.
I didn't notice this behavior in previous versions.
Didi
--
Dropping isn't good or bad, however if you're not careful it could come
around and bite you on the back side.
I notify the 'recipient' in the event the email in question was expected
(part of a project, family / business correspondence etc).
Otherwise they could be wondering where their email is,
> On Saturday 20 March 2004 02:32, Jim Maul wrote:
>
>> The message gets quarantined and no one is notified.
>
> Why ? Virus message is not quarantined, it's rejected.
> All it is depend from configuration.
>
because qmail does not "reject anything" at smtp time by default. Thefore
it gets accept
> On Fri, 2004-03-19 at 17:01, jef moskot wrote:
>> Worse than that, if the virus is still attached, you're now sending it
>> to
>> someone who might not have otherwise received it. You're helping to
>> spread the infection.
>
> When I say bounce I mean reject. We try not to accept them. But
> som
We run clamAV on a bunch of RH 6.2 servers, and it runs fine except on one
server. We are running 0.68-1, using clamd in procmail to scan for viruses
on an individual mailbox basis:
/usr/local/bin/clamdscan --disable-summary --stdout -
On this one machine, clamd will often use up all available
23 matches
Mail list logo
