[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: clamav/oav-update/scannerdaemon

On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 08:11:16AM +1300, Matthew Grant wrote:
> If the Clam AV database is going to be kept very up to date, then
> OAV-update is not needed any more, and should be removed from Debian.  

I have been told that it will be kept more up-to-date then the
oav-update database.

I have now officially orphaned scannerdaemon, as there didn't seem
to be any interest fixing the bug with the newest database.

I have not yet removed scannerdaemon from Debian yet though.

> However, it has a modular design, and it is able to be extended to cover
> the new database formats, as well as pull data from multiple sources, as
> well as adding site-local data.  Does anyone else want to step up to the
> table to take it over. 

It is possible that oav-update could be a better updater then freshclam.

Currently freshclam doesn't check the cryptographic signature after
downloading the viruses to ensure that they haven't been altered.
(I have filled a bug about this).

However, the signatures, I believe are a detached GPG signature, can
oav-update cope with this?
Brian May <bam@debian.org>

Reply to: