Re: [clamav-users] Detection in windows but not Linux

2015-12-13 Thread Steve Basford
On Sun, December 13, 2015 2:25 am, Kurt Fitzner wrote: > > The file is definitely malware - it was injected through a WordPress > vulnerability. I have a virus scan that runs hourly on my wordpress folder > just for that reason, but this one slipped through the cracks. I want to > find out what

Re: [clamav-users] Detection in windows but not Linux

2015-12-13 Thread Al Varnell
I guess I don’t know what a “non-normalized ascii file” is. 0d0a is just an ASCII carriage return & line. It’s also a relatively old signature, so one would hope that if it needed correction that would have happened by now. -Al- On Dec 12, 2015, at 11:50 PM, Arnaud Jacques / SecuriteInfo.com

Re: [clamav-users] Detection in windows but not Linux

2015-12-13 Thread Al Varnell
I didn't expect the test signature to be successful as my understanding of the way the scanner works requires an exact match to the ASCII string. My familiarity is with ClamXav for OS X which uses an unmatched version of the UNIX ClamAV engine and have no idea what ClamWin uses that might cause

Re: [clamav-users] Detection in windows but not Linux

2015-12-13 Thread Kurt Fitzner
To my embarrassment, the Windows/Linux detection issue was mostly of my making. WinSCP does CR/LF translation of text files by default. The rest you can now all guess. I transferred the malware from my Linux box using a LF -> CR/LF translation mode by mistake. It is the CR/LF version that is

Re: [clamav-users] Detection in windows but not Linux

2015-12-13 Thread G.W. Haywood
Hi there, On Sun, 13 Dec 2015, Arnaud Jacques wrote: For me PHP.Shell-83 is wrong. It contains 0d0a. It means it has been created with a non-normalized ascii file. I guess it should be corrected. In my current main.cld, 4636 of the approximately 2.4 million signatures in the file contain the

Re: [clamav-users] Detection in windows but not Linux

2015-12-13 Thread Kurt Fitzner
The question remains as to why the signature correctly leads to a match in Windows but not Linux. If carriage return linefeed handling differences between the two OSes are to blame, then I suggest a two pronged approach. Correct the signatures, AND patch clamav so that the signatures as

Re: [clamav-users] Detection in windows but not Linux

2015-12-13 Thread Al Varnell
I would want to know the results of using the test signature on both systems first, and file a bug report if it turns out to be a ClamAV problem. Sent from Janet's iPad -Al- On Dec 13, 2015, at 11:49 AM, Kurt Fitzner wrote: > The question remains as to why the signature correctly leads to a

Re: [clamav-users] Detection in windows but not Linux

2015-12-13 Thread Kurt Fitzner
Hi Al, Just got home ans was able to test. Test signature from Steve fails to detect on both Linux and Windows. Tested on Linux with 0.98.7 supplied Debian binaries, and 0.99 binary compiled by myself. Tested in Windows with ClamWin supplied binary. Should I submit my copy of the malware

Re: [clamav-users] Detection in windows but not Linux

2015-12-13 Thread Kurt Fitzner
The file is the classic "FilesMan" backdoor. It's been around for a while. I always look at VT for anything suspicious, but I just re-ran it through. 15 out of 54 AV's surveyed find it stinky. Here's the link: