The reports in HTML or TXT are very different. Files that are infected but ignored (because of auto-skip for example) are specified in the TXT report (which is a good thing) but are not specified in the HTML report. Can you help me understand why this difference in behavior? Is it a bug?
For my part I find it rather good that it is specified in the report that a file is infected even if it has not been quarantined (or other action) it is a report of what was found...
Hello,
The reports in HTML or TXT are very different. Files that are infected but ignored (because of auto-skip for example) are specified in the TXT report (which is a good thing) but are not specified in the HTML report. Can you help me understand why this difference in behavior? Is it a bug?
For my part I find it rather good that it is specified in the report that a file is infected even if it has not been quarantined (or other action) it is a report of what was found...
Request for txt report :
/opt/PHP-Antimalware-Scanner/scanner \"/var/www/clients/client3/web53/web\" -e --auto-skip --report --path-report /var/www/clients/client3/web53/private/report.txt --report-format txt
command final result :
Result : https://pastebin.zici.fr/?d47e27a7911d7fcc#9oUJuw7d9LYe5AAyAeyPJ7eSiRyUjFcay6DY8rpFg55C
Request for html report :
/opt/PHP-Antimalware-Scanner/scanner \"/var/www/clients/client3/web53/web\" -e --auto-skip --report --path-report /var/www/clients/client3/web53/private/report.txt --report-format html
command final result :
Result : https://pastebin.zici.fr/?23abcb9d8b7c5fb4#D86jRfKEGB8GiPDLjECA7AAnbaA7UVH9i5DYF35dZXas
Thank's, David