in Open Source Software.
I'm *not* saying anything bad about clamav, we first used it as test
while we searched the budget for commercial AV software and never saw a
need for more. This list has proven to be exceptional as well.
Clamav is great, MailScanner just makes it even better.
DAve
--
Dave
Nigel Horne wrote:
On Tuesday 22 Mar 2005 14:51, Dave Goodrich wrote:
Nigel Horne wrote:
On Tuesday 22 Mar 2005 14:27, Rob MacGregor wrote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 19:33:03 +0530, Nabin Limbu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
What are the benefits of using 3rd party software like Mailscanner, Mimedefang
Cormack, Ken wrote:
-Original Message-
Dave Goodrich wrote:
We use MailScanner because it offers additional tools, delivery options,
routing, and filtering above clamav. We also do not have issues with the
clam daemon that some have had. Julian is exceedingly responsive to his
Jim Maul wrote:
snip
If my car is broken usually I take it to a mechanic. But if a friend of
mine who happens to be a plumber can fix it also, does it really matter
if I bring it to him instead? No.
-Jim
Ok, I took part in the previous discussion and I accept the developers
decision. But I
Julian Mehnle wrote:
Dennis Skinner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Julian Mehnle wrote:
Besides, if mail servers started using SPF (or similar authentication
techniques) to verify envelope sender addresses, whoever publishes SPF
records for his domains would be
Not to start another flame war, but I find
Trog wrote:
On Mon, 2004-11-15 at 16:39, Dave Goodrich wrote:
Julian Mehnle wrote:
Am I? I'm just saying that I think that a distinction between technical
attacks and social engineering attacks is possible and meaningful (even if
not everyone would make use of that distinction). That has nothing
Tomasz Kojm wrote:
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:04:39 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ken Jones wrote:
I think the thing to remember here is that we are discussing
scanning of email. If the email is malicious, then having clamav
remove it is a good thing in my opinion. Spam (uce/ube) that poses
no
Dennis Skinner wrote:
Dave Goodrich wrote:
My preference has been stated. I would prefer SpamAssassin do the
puzzle solving of message bodies, headers, URI lookups, message
obfuscation, etc and let ClamAV do the signature matching of attachments.
SA uses many more resources than ClamAV. Clam
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
I find it interesting though that I've yet to hear from anyone
commenting on my proposal to create a filter that will extract and
convert all emails into pure text, or reformat it so only certain things
can get through as an attachment with a pure text message so it
FreeBSD 4.8 dual intel 1.3gz, 1gb ram, Running Clamav in Mailscanner
procesing 100k messages a day. Load rarely above 1, runnng over a year
with no problems.
DAve
Timo Schöler wrote:
Anyone running ClamAv in an SMP server?
yes. Sun Ultra 80 Dual CPU/Solaris 9 in testing environment,
10 matches
Mail list logo
