Kaspersky Virus Issues

Julian Field mailscanner at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Sat Jan 18 13:04:27 GMT 2003


I wouldn't be surprised at all that Kaspersky only works if called from 1
directory. It is the most oddly-written package I have seen in years.

Who would have thought that someone could write a command-line virus
scanner, where the location of the files to be scanned cannot be defined on
the command-line?
And instead of allowing config file options to be over-ridden on the
command-line (like everyone else does), they do it in reverse.

Weird...

At 20:17 17/01/2003, you wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Hello,
>
>         I have a user of DansGuardian Anti-Virus that is using Kaspersky
>anti-virus.  He complained about really long scan times of > 100
>seconds.  When I looked into it, it appears that the kaspersky-wrapper
>script is running the kavscanner program, but it never returns or
>outputs anything.  This is Kaspersky 3.0 build 136.
>
>         I tracked it down to kaspersky needing to be in the /opt/AVP
> directory
>when calling kavscanner so that it could load it's definition files.
>Even then, it is taking around 9-13 seconds to scan small html files
>where f-prot does it in 0-1 seconds.  I added a 'cd ${PackageDir}'
>before the exec line.
>
>         Can anyone comment to verify if I have correctly resolved this and/or
>if a newer version of Kaspersky can be launched from anywhere and still
>get to it's virus definition files?
>
>         Thank you,
>- --
>James A. Pattie
>james at pcxperience.com
>
>Linux  --  SysAdmin / Programmer
>Xperience, Inc.
>http://www.pcxperience.com/
>http://www.xperienceinc.com/
>
>GPG Key Available at http://www.pcxperience.com/gpgkeys/james.html
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
>Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
>iD8DBQE+KGTqtUXjwPIRLVERAmHHAKDF+5E9KpanuQOzum1bfJVWXWxB4gCgrwY5
>XKBISSZSn8W055CXq/YVRGY=
>=Nnpd
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>--
>This message has been scanned for viruses and
>dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>believed to be clean.

--
Julian Field
www.MailScanner.info
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support



More information about the MailScanner mailing list