We are stopping tons of klez infected mail using
the same sender address.
My question is regarding the reported remote ip
address - the ip address reported using the %remoteip% is that the actually ip
address of the computer sending the virus or is that also forged by the
virus?
So far I
My question is regarding the reported remote ip address - the ip address
reported using the %remoteip% is that the actually ip address of the
computer sending the virus or is that also forged by the virus?
The IP address cannot be forged by the virus, so it will always be correct.
So what good does that do when Klez has it's own smtp engine and
always tries to connect to the senders mail server address.
Say if I got infected and klez would spoof your address [EMAIL PROTECTED]
then klez on my machine would connect to the mx server for knl.cc and
try to send out the message
This is my personal understand from reading some of their fuzzy
license agreements and from what I heard what different reps been
stating (everyone with a different story).
You can run mcafee. If you have a 1 single license then you need to
set MAXATONCE to 1 in your virus.cfg file with declude.
As a McAfee reseller, and by earlier threads, I had a long conversation
with a senior licensing person at McAfee, and the synopsis is that in
the usage of scanning incoming and outgoing e-mail messages REQUIRES a
per mail box license.
John Tolmachoff
IT Manager, Network Engineer
RelianceSoft,
As a McAfee reseller, and by earlier threads, I had a long conversation
with a senior licensing
person at McAfee, and the synopsis is that in the usage of scanning
incoming and outgoing e-mail
messages REQUIRES a per mail box license.
I was just looking at that thread.
I had though there was
Although it could very easily be argued that the per mailbox
licensing
scheme, if McAfee's license indeed requires it, would apply to *all*
mailboxes on the Internet, requiring an unlimited number of licenses.
:)
OK, OK, I should have clarified
Per Mailbox being provided direct benefit.
So,
I am currently looking into Kaperseky and Command AV, plus a few others.
John Tolmachoff
IT Manager, Network Engineer
RelianceSoft, Inc.
Fullerton, CA 92835
www.reliancesoft.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Paul Ingram
Sent:
Although it could very easily be argued that the per mailbox licensing
scheme, if McAfee's license indeed requires it, would apply to *all*
mailboxes on the Internet, requiring an unlimited number of licenses. :)
OK, OK, I should have clarified
Per Mailbox being provided direct benefit.
Subject Change to Scanner other then McAfee was MacAfee kosher or
not?
I rather end that one.
I am currently looking into Kaperseky and Command AV, plus a few
others.
Thanks let us know how it goes.
What about Sophos? I guess I could try that one. I bet it cost I
will let the list
How about Norman Virus Control?? Their license appears to be no-nonsense,
is $60/year, and doesn't seem to care whether a system is a server or not.
- Original Message -
From: Paul Ingram [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 3:18 PM
Subject: RE:
Isn't Command just F-Prot dressed up a little?
Jerry
- Original Message -
From: John Tolmachoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 4:02 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.Virus] MacAfee kosher or not?
I am currently looking into Kaperseky and Command AV,
Scott, I agree with you that their licensing is skewed.
And yes, it is designed for a business, not an ISP.
What the rep finally told me was to just resell their products that was
appropriate to the situation. This was after I told him I was not in any
position to shell out $1500 as an OEM
One comment I do have to make is that Declude is also staying on top of
vulnerabilities and the added benefit of banned extensions.
This helps make up the shortcomings of F-Prot.
John Tolmachoff
IT Manager, Network Engineer
RelianceSoft, Inc.
Fullerton, CA 92835
www.reliancesoft.com
---
According to F-Prot web site, they are using the engine.
But could they be creating there own definitions and updates?
John Tolmachoff
IT Manager, Network Engineer
RelianceSoft, Inc.
Fullerton, CA 92835
www.reliancesoft.com
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus
You know it's funny every one at McAfee and McAfee reseller have
different views. How can a company write so crappy end user
agreements that NOBODY can give a single straight answer is beyond me.
But then I guess that is what they want. Trick or make people buy more
licenses so the fuzzyer it's
Scott,
I recently added the FORGINGVIRUS tag to my virus.cfg. It works great.
However, I have some users that would like to see the real address. I
told them that it is a server wide setting. I looked in the log file
and I see that it had been changed there as well. Is it possible to
save
What virus scanner is completely legal to use with declude and
without purchasing several thousand licences for?.
Stephen Tyers
Online anytime with http://www.tyenet.com chat.tyenet.com
---
[This E-mail
http://www.f-prot.com/
Have a great day!
Rick Davidson
Buckeye Internet Services
www.buckeyeweb.com
440-953-1900
-
- Original Message -
From: Full Name [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 5:31 PM
Subject: [Declude.Virus] Legal issue
What virus
I recently added the FORGINGVIRUS tag to my virus.cfg. It works great.
However, I have some users that would like to see the real address. I
told them that it is a server wide setting. I looked in the log file
and I see that it had been changed there as well. Is it possible to
save the FROM
20 matches
Mail list logo
