Jim Maul wrote:
You seem to be missing the point here. Nowhere that i saw did anyone
say that they are scanning the mailboxes INSTEAD of at smtp time. This
mailbox scanning is in addition to smtp scanning. I think anyone could
agree that additional scanning is beneficial (although not always
necessary). Thefore, i dont see the point of your argument.
-Jim
_______________________________________________
A quote from a previous email(not from me):
It would be theoretically possible to do all the above on line, but the
chances of dying from a DOS attack would be very high. So off-line
scanning for malware and spam seems to me to be the best way to go unless
you have unlimited horsepower.
To me this implies that they want offline scanning instead. I could be wrong
in the interpretation. It is just my counterpoint that this is not always
the case.
But anyway, why would you want to perform additional virus scanning of
mailboxes if it is all scanned upon arrival anyway? The only reason
I could think is if virus definitions were updated after some malware
had already been accepted and you want to go back and look for it.
I don't see this happening in large environments though.
Steve
_______________________________________________
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
