Re: [clamav-users] Freshclam Non-repudiation

2016-01-29 Thread Benny Pedersen
On 2016-01-29 23:28, Al Varnell wrote: Not sure how you would arrive at that conclusion. SaneSecurity is not affiliated with Cisco/SourceFire/ClamAV. sadly true :( hopefully all 3dr party sigs will be sourcefire signed oneday until then gpg works __

Re: [clamav-users] Freshclam Non-repudiation

2016-01-29 Thread Al Varnell
Not sure how you would arrive at that conclusion. SaneSecurity is not affiliated with Cisco/SourceFire/ClamAV. Sent from Janet's iPad -Al- On Jan 29, 2016, at 2:12 PM, Brad Scalio wrote: > I think I answered my own question, Sansecurity. > > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Brad Scalio wrote

Re: [clamav-users] Freshclam Non-repudiation

2016-01-29 Thread Brad Scalio
I think I answered my own question, Sansecurity. On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Brad Scalio wrote: > Thanks Steve that does help, who's the CA or at least the certs aren't > self-signed correct? > > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016, 14:42 Steven Morgan wrote: > >> Brad, >> >> The official ClamAV virus da

Re: [clamav-users] Freshclam Non-repudiation

2016-01-29 Thread Brad Scalio
Thanks Steve that does help, who's the CA or at least the certs aren't self-signed correct? On Fri, Jan 29, 2016, 14:42 Steven Morgan wrote: > Brad, > > The official ClamAV virus database is digitally signed before posting to > the ClamAV mirrors. The CVD signature is checked before database loa

Re: [clamav-users] Freshclam Non-repudiation

2016-01-29 Thread Steven Morgan
Brad, The official ClamAV virus database is digitally signed before posting to the ClamAV mirrors. The CVD signature is checked before database load time. Virus names of signatures from non-signed databases are appended with ".UNOFFICIAL". Hope this helps, Steve On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 5:29 PM,

Re: [clamav-users] Freshclam Non-repudiation

2016-01-29 Thread Benny Pedersen
On 2016-01-29 09:27, Steve Basford wrote: As Sanesecurity have been doing this for 10 years this year, hopefully the GPG key can be trusted ;) will extradatabasee ever be used in freshclam :( will unofficial ever go away :( thanks for the github link btw, seems i can finaly stay with clamav

Re: [clamav-users] 800-53 (Rev. 4) Question {the first}

2016-01-29 Thread TR Shaw
ClamAV does provide for heuristic detection and its normal ruleset includes heuristic rule as does the UNOFFICIAL feeds.It meets the mail for NIST as well as DCID (and its followon regs) Tom > On Jan 29, 2016, at 7:01 AM, Brad Scalio wrote: > > Can anyone answer the mail on this control enhan

[clamav-users] 800-53 (Rev. 4) Question {the first}

2016-01-29 Thread Brad Scalio
Can anyone answer the mail on this control enhancement in NIST 800-53 (Rev. 4) and if Clam AV has this in 0.99 release and if not, if anyone has any fodder or websites that can explain this more ... again many thanks and if this isn't the correct listserver to use for this many apologies. SI-3(7)

Re: [clamav-users] Freshclam Non-repudiation

2016-01-29 Thread Brad Scalio
Thanks for the quick replies and information, this helps greatly and is much appreciated! On Jan 29, 2016 03:28, "Steve Basford" wrote: > > On Thu, January 28, 2016 10:29 pm, Brad Scalio wrote: > > Is there any integrity or authenticity checks within freshclam when it > > connects to the clamAV s

Re: [clamav-users] Freshclam Non-repudiation

2016-01-29 Thread Steve Basford
On Thu, January 28, 2016 10:29 pm, Brad Scalio wrote: > Is there any integrity or authenticity checks within freshclam when it > connects to the clamAV servers to download the virus signature databases? Hi Brad, Just to cover 3rd Party (.UNOFFICIAL) signatures. Signatures produced by Sanesecuri