On Sat, 4 Oct 2008, Eric Rostetter wrote: > > .... But when a mail filter 'fails', mail goes through UNFILTERED, > > and UNNOTICED. This is just WRONG. Sorry, it is. > The OP was complaining that it did cause the mailer (exim) to stop.
Well, I feel sorry for him if this happens on a weekend when he's not there, but at least there isn't mail going through unfiltered. > And if the config is wrong, and it continues to run with the wrong config, > it will possibly let mail through UNFILTERED and UNNOTICED. Why isn't > this just WRONG? Sorry, it is. It *is* wrong. Just the lesser of two evils letting *some* mail through unfiltered compared to letting ALL mail through in this condition. > If you want better support, sign up for "Certified ClamAV Support"... I am not personally bothered by the level of support. I install my ClamAV manually. And I'll likely write my own watchdog script. But I am a community advocate for internet accessibility, and I stand up for those people trying to get into the 'internet age' with too little money. > While this thread has brought up a valid complaint (it doesn't log an > error when the config file is bad and it is started in daemon mode), Actually, logging would be insufficient. An e-mail notice needs to be sent. > People who don't understand why you don't do (untested) automatic updates > on a production server just don't get it.... People who don't understand how millions of people continue to setup 'out of the box' small servers on tight budgets, are the ones who don't get it. > ..... and no continuation of this thread will help them get it. Indeed, we agree here. But this thread is not about helping these people "get it". That is just trying to shove the 'big money' answer down the throat of people without 'big money'. I am proposing solutions that will best serve the interests of the 'small money' (or 'no money') sector, and thereby promote the overall goal of making all systems more secure. > I'm quite sure SourceFire and the clamav developers know how to handle > these things properly, and will do so when the 1.0 release comes out > (within the 1.x release tree). People who don't understand this just > don't get it, and never will. I leave it up to you as to what *you* choose to 'get', but the other part of the 0.x release level process IS this feedback and discussion. Taking an idealized excellent product and putting it up against the 'real world' so that it can most effectively do the job it has set out to do. And really, to keep things in perspective, this is a *quibble* about an excellent package. Let's not miss the fact that the developers have got some serious good stuff here. We're thankful for it. :) - Charles _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
