fix: Allow clamd to start normally when a whitelist is present.

[userwiths]

This PR is an attempt to fix issue #1174

The given functionality was introduced in the following commit and after taking a look at the cli_cvdverify function I believe it is meant to verify only CVDs.

That is, it throws an error when encountering a clear text (whitelist, .ign,.ign2) file. I mimicked the way the allowed extensions in the Database folder were handled, and excluded the 2 clear text extensions mentioned above. This has locally allowed for the normal execution of clamd.

[val-ms]

Thank you for working on a solution to this bug.

The same issue occurs when adding individual signature files outside of a CVD or CLD archive. E.g. if you drop in "clamav.hdb" file containing a hash-based signature, then clamd loading will still fail with:

❯ ./install/sbin/clamd -F
LibClamAV Error: cli_cvdverify: Can't read CVD header
LibClamAV Error: cl_cvdgetage: cvdgetfileage() failed for /home/micah/workspace/clamav-micah-5/build/install/share/clamav/clamav.hdb

So rather than having cl_cvdgetage ignore specific extensions like ".ign2", it would be better to only verify for ".cvd" and ".cld".

[userwiths]

Yeah, I'm not familiar with all of the extensions so the clarification is more than welcome.
As discussed now the cl_cvdgetage checks only CVD and CLD files.

[val-ms]

Hi @userwiths I thought of one other issue. If anyone tries to run clamscan where they pass in specific databases rather than using a database directory, it will still fail.

E.g.:

❯ clamscan -d ~/clamav.hdb -d ~/.cvdupdate/database/bytecode.cvd --fail-if-cvd-older-than=5 /path/to/file
LibClamAV Error: cli_cvdverify: Can't read CVD header
ERROR: Broken or not a CVD file

I think to fix this, we'll need to check if the database path ends with ".cvd" or ".cld" in this location: https://github.com/userwiths/clamav/blob/8474e6a86d45ba2b084bd7d3719947db90aa5543/clamscan/manager.c#L1253-L1254

What do you think?

[userwiths]

I think that you are correct.
Despite that, I saw a specific scenario for which I took a decision that might be worth a notice.

I noticed that clamscan proceeds without a notice even if a file/directory passed with -d does not exist.
Don't know if that is intentional or not, my current changes exit with an error and log on the screen a message with the path to the missing file.

In case you think it would be better to keep the behavior as it was, just say so and I will change it accordingly.

[val-ms]

I noticed that clamscan proceeds without a notice even if a file/directory passed with -d does not exist.

I wasn't able to reproduce this, or else I don't fully understand what you mean. I believe it should fail if the -d file or directory does not exist. So I'm good with your change either way.

Your PR seems good to me. I was doing some local testing after a rebase. I'm going to squash it down to one commit as well and then force-push that.