David Skoll wrote: > > (Well, OK. Some RP employees use Windoze at home, and I suppose they > > might check their e-mail from home, so Clam probably is more useful > > than I'm admitting... grumble grumble...) > > My colleague Dave O'Neill pointed out that Clam has signatures > against phishing attacks (which are platform-independent.) It blocks > about six per day for us. > > Do any commercial AV scanners have phishing signatures? If not, that's > a very strong argument for Clam.
McAfee definitely has its own way of identifying "phishing" email, not familiar enough with any other AV software. I've found that rejecting/discarding mail based on domain mismatch (domain of sender is x.com and relay host domain is y.com, or better yet, the relay is an IP address) for domains like ebay.com, citibank.com, and paypal.com is very effective at stopping phishing attempts. Combine that with AV software and there's a very low probably of this stuff getting through to your mail users. As for "not running systems that systems that are susceptible to email viruses", that's just job security ;-). - Chris _______________________________________________ Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca MIMEDefang mailing list [email protected] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
