Hi, > > but, I'm interested to hear what others use; > are commercial scanners significantly better than Clam ?
to be honest, i dont have much trust in all this commercial scanners pretending to have a larger pattern list than others. maybe the companies themself write a lot of Beagle.XXX just to have another virus detected befor all other companies. what counts is performance. clamd is great in performance issues. I just found kaspersky daemon wich is faster and may have more patterns then clamd. trophie and sophie are imho patchwork and at least on FreeBSD running with bad performanve and trophie just with socket errors. cmd scanners are slow and cannot be used in high performance env. you may want to add some as backup for your daemons, but just for this case. f-prot and antivir f.e. Cheers, Marc -- Marc Szochay (Pilgerer Org.) http://www.pilgerer.org/ - Die Kommunikations- und Kooperations- plattform fuer Unix-Fans und alle die es werden wollen. Macht mit! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ AMaViS-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
