For spam/virus filtering at the firewall level, I personally have used a combination of amavisd-new+spamassassin+clamav+postfix, I've also used postfix+dspam, for those who don't host a mail server, you can use p3scan+spamassassin(or dspam)+clamav to do transparent pop3 scanning. Also, I *believe* mailscanner can be used on a filtering gateway.
For http traffic, I prefer squid+various redirectors. There are several antivirus-scanner tie-ins for squid redirectors, some of them work better than others. I have not personally used HAVP so I can't speak to its effectiveness. And then as far as content filtering (blocking objectionable material like porn), most of them are squid redirectors (i.e.: squidGuard, dansguardian, squirm, soulcatcher, etc.). The company I work for is in the content-filtering business so I've looked at just about every one in existence. Most of them work pretty much the same way and they all have their advantages and drawbacks. Unfortunately, most software that falls into this category is either commercial, or an inactive project. -Gary PS: Most of the AV companies like to license by the number of computers or seats. I've not really seen a compelling reason to move away from clamav, but others may have different viewpoints. -----Original Message----- From: chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 12:24 PM To: discussion@pfsense.com Subject: Re: [pfSense-discussion] Re: Content Filtering Gary Buckmaster wrote: >There are lots of superior open source solutions for spam and virus >filtering at the firewall level. The same is true for doing virus filtering >of http traffic. Content Filtering (ie: URL filtering) has several really >good options as well. > What do you suggest? >My personal opinion is that we encourage people who >have a solution that they like, to put together a package for pfsense. > What open source packages does the list use? I, personally, don't see any reason why several different solution packages couldn't co-exist in the packages tree and let people choose the one that >works best for their site. I personally may not want to use HAVP, but I >know lots of people who like it. > What do you use instead of HAVP? >SquidGuard works great for my purposes, >but lots of people like Dansguardian. Having choices is always preferable. > > Agreed. >As for Dansguardian, I know that the author is working directly for >Smoothwall Ltd. selling essentially a competing product to pfSense. > He is a director as I understand it who gave away or sold off the blacklist url business. > I would >be curious to see if the $500 license would be adequate. > > I wonder what sort of deal Fprot would offer? >-Gary > >-----Original Message----- >From: chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 10:41 AM >To: discussion@pfsense.com >Subject: Re: [pfSense-discussion] Re: Content Filtering > > >Scott Ullrich wrote: > > > >>Last I checked Dans Guardian was 500$ for a commercial license. If >>it comes down to it, the community can always pitch in and buy a >>license. I've spoken with someone from Dans Guardian in the past and >>they seemed very willing to help out. >> >>Scott >> >> >>On 10/26/05, chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > > > >>I know that most of the business proponents seem to be interested in >> >> >copfilter for the virus and spam filtering. IPCop is > > >>the only distro to offer this as an Open source solution. Albeit an addon >> >> >which breaks every time IPCop is upgraded. The > > >>copfilter download page states it has had 3309 downloads in four weeks. >> >> >> >> > >Chris > > > > >
