CLEANACCESS Archives

October 2008

CLEANACCESS@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Caines, Max" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 9 Oct 2008 16:34:28 +0100
Content-Type:
multipart/signed
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (4 kB) , smime.p7s (5 kB)
I've just tried, and AVG 8.0 Home accepts the definitions as up-to-date if I
set the Windows region to English US. Why this is necessary for some AV
packages and not for others, I can't imagine. 

I have to say that as a customer I find this a bit depressing. It's not the
first problem in Clean Access that has been tied to regional settings. It's
about time that Cisco treated the rest of the world as though it mattered
too. 

My thanks to Nate for explaining how to turn off date/time checks for
signatures. I'd seen the check box, but didn't know that it had quite that
effect

Regards

Max

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Nathaniel Austin
> Sent: 09 October 2008 15:14
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CLEANACCESS] 4.1.7 agent
> 
> I'm just theorizing here based on what you've said, and I 
> agree that it 
> is weird - thats why I would run a test to make sure thats it 
> and that 
> its not something else causing it.
> 
> If that is the case then I would probably consider it a bug.
> 
> Nate
> 
> Dennis Xu wrote:
> > I will check if English/US will work.
> >
> > If I uncheck that box and do version check, I cannot allow 
> definition files to be X days older? It only allows the 
> latest version, correct?
> >
> > I am still wondering why with current set up(allow 
> definition files to be X days older), some AV products work 
> fine with English/Canada setting. For ex, McAfee 8.5 
> Enterprise works but McAfee 13 does not work. If it is caused 
> by regional setting, why McAfee 8.5 works? I would say 
> majority of AVs work fine under this setup.
> >
> > Dennis 
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Nathaniel Austin" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2008 9:58:55 AM GMT -05:00 
> US/Canada Eastern
> > Subject: Re: 4.1.7 agent
> >
> > Hey Dennis,
> >
> > I would check to see if English/US would work - just to 
> verify that is 
> > the problem.
> >
> > Yes the CAM can check on version. Under your requirement 
> rules you have 
> > the option that is highlighted yellow that says allow 
> definition files 
> > to be X days older than. If you uncheck that box it will do version 
> > instead of date checks.
> >
> > Nate
> >
> > Dennis Xu wrote:
> >   
> >> I was thinking about regional format as well. One user has 
> regional format English/Canada and the other user has 
> regional format English/UK. The date format for both regions 
> are DDMMYYYY. I believe if they set the format to English/US 
> that will work. But I believe all the users laptops here are 
> default to English/Canada. That is a big problem. Can CAM 
> checks for definition version, not date?   
> >>
> >> Dennis 
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Nathaniel Austin" <[log in to unmask]>
> >> To: [log in to unmask]
> >> Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2008 9:28:31 AM GMT -05:00 
> US/Canada Eastern
> >> Subject: Re: 4.1.7 agent
> >>
> >> Hey Dennis,
> >>
> >> May be a problem with the date format - in the CAM it 
> shows the date as 
> >> "10/07/2008" but it looks like the agent reported 
> "07/10/2008" from its 
> >> API call to the McAfee product - What date format is the 
> client set to 
> >> in the Windows settings?
> >>
> >> Nate
> >>
> >> Dennis Xu wrote:
> >>   
> >>     
> >>> I have seen two cases that 4.1.7 failed to recognize 
> McAfee 13 virus definition. For ex, the following user failed 
> virus definition check:
> >>>
> >>> Client AV Info
> >>>  
> >>> Product ID: McAfeeAV 
> >>> Product Name: McAfee VirusScan 
> >>> Product Version: 13.0.218 
> >>> Virus Definition File Version: 5400 
> >>> Virus Definition File Date: 07/10/2008 
> >>>
> >>> Anyone knows if it is a known bug?
> >>>
> >>> Dennis 
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "Don Click" <[log in to unmask]>
> >>> To: [log in to unmask]
> >>> Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2008 9:39:24 AM GMT -05:00 
> US/Canada Eastern
> >>> Subject: Re: 4.1.7 agent
> >>>
> >>> Yes, our system is setup to auto push the new agent. I do 
> have a few people using it, but haven't tested it myself.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kyle Torkelson
> >>> Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 8:06 AM
> >>> To: [log in to unmask]
> >>> Subject: 4.1.7 agent
> >>>
> >>> Has anyone been pushing out the 4.1.7 agent??  I saw it posted on
> >>> Cisco's software downloads section giving the following fixes:
> >>>
> >>> CSCsr75771      Support for Symantec Corp 10.1.5.500
> >>> CSCsr87134      Vista wired/wifi MAC address fix
> >>> CSCsr97355      Support for AVG 8
> >>>
> >>> Can anyone also address if 4.1.7 is going to be an agent 
> fix only and no
> >>> CAM/CAS release???
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>>
> >>> Kyle Torkelson
> >>> Senior Network Administrator
> >>> University of Sioux Falls
> >>>   
> >>>     
> >>>       
> 


ATOM RSS1 RSS2