Re: [clamav-users] Is the signature "Win.Tool.Hoax-9939325-0" really problematic ?

On Apr 11, 2022, at 12:05 AM, alex via clamav-users wrote: > Is there a way to bypass the lifting of this signature, without completely > ignoring it, if it ultimately proves useful against other files? You can include an .fp file. See the documentation for format:

Re: [clamav-users] Is the signature "Win.Tool.Hoax-9939325-0" really problematic ?

Thanks for your reply. You are right, I'm not a native English speaker. I went too fast using automatic translators and I didn't review it enough. :D I forgot to mention that I tested our binary with other antivirus and none of them raised an alert. In the meantime, we will look at your possible

Re: [clamav-users] Is the signature "Win.Tool.Hoax-9939325-0" really problematic ?

Hi there, On Mon, 11 Apr 2022, alex via clamav-users wrote: Recently, ClamAV sent us the following alert "Win.Tool.Hoax-9939325-0" on one of our executables. This software was developed by our teams and has not been modified since 2014. And suddenly, an alert is lifted... On a point of order

[clamav-users] Is the signature "Win.Tool.Hoax-9939325-0" really problematic ?

Hi all, Recently, ClamAV sent us the following alert "Win.Tool.Hoax-9939325-0" on one of our executables. This software was developed by our teams and has not been modified since 2014. And suddenly, an alert is lifted... After some research in the ClamAV VirusDB announcements, I found that this