On 23/08/04 10:53 +0530, Sameer D. Sahasrabuddhe wrote: > On Sun, Aug 22, 2004 at 10:35:03PM +0530, Devdas Bhagat wrote: > > > The setup itself is trivial. Depending on your mail volume, you may want > > to farm the scanner to another system altogether. > > Another trick to reduce the load is to use Postfix 2.x which has a built > > in MIME parser and block attachments with specific extensions (.pif, > > .com, .exe, .vbs, etc). > > What I am specifically looking for is a setup that can eliminate the > need to blindly drop zip files. Our servers already use clam with > qmail.
More recent versions of amavisd-new identify encrypted zip files and can take action on that. > > > Is there an auto-learning phase involved? What are the pro's and cons > > > of such auto-learning scanners? > > > > No autolearning phase. > > The mail I received mentioned an autolearning phase, hence the > question. > > I just wanted to cover some ground based on other people's experience > before digging. I suppose clam is a safe bet as usual. Any numbers > about the performance? Especially missed viruses and false hits. No missed viruses, two false hits from amavisd-new when someone sent a .dll file (banned by policy, so it had to be pulled out of quarantine). Devdas Bhagat -- http://mm.ilug-bom.org.in/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
