-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On March 5, 2003 11:02 am, Ian Bruseker wrote: > After much googling, I've found F-Prot. It's reasonably priced > (no per-mailbox pricing as some other products have), and its Windows > version is also very attractively priced (Windows desktops here also run > McAfee, also an old version, so if I'm replacing one, I'll replace the > others too). But further googling for reviews and such say it's not the > fastest and it's not novice friendly. I'm not worried about the novice > thing, but I would hate to waste money on a poorly performing product. Has > anyone here used it? I had used F-prot for years while using DOS, and always seemed to perform well for me, Then I recently came across the Linux version (yehh!) I tried it out and it found the [EMAIL PROTECTED] and W32/Opaserv.worm.C in two old spam messages I had still around from an unused account. Nothing became of the virii, since they were never executed, but I was happy to find them none the less. It took me around 27 minutes to run through my linux box, and two w98 boxes (5 different drives) through the network. I'm not sure about scanning SMTP traffic tho'. - -- Mike Fitton GPG Fingerprint = A4E3 C5D4 5D62 6F98 165D FEC3 2FA7 C08F 0DB6 32A5 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+ZovSL6fAjw22MqURAsQ7AJ46puJT/Xut8EUnA1+vyvn6uS0j6gCeI6EH WRZpm2hSqvEHcmUCAHg0jHQ= =TViN -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
