Re: virus scan for qpopper?

2000-09-28 Thread Alan Brown

On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Len Conrad wrote:

> >Hi all,
> >Anyone know of software to scan emails for viruses as they are processed
> >out to the user by qpopper?  Or I suppose as they come in through sendmail
> >for that matter?
> 
> SMTP would be a better protocol to scan.  check

Virus scanning isn't a SMTP-level item. This can really only be done
at procmail level before placing the message in the recipient's mailbox.

As previously noted, Interscan Viruswall may filter virii, but it's
a spammer's wet dream. 

AB




Re: virus scan for qpopper?

2000-09-28 Thread Alan Brown

On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, penda paul wrote:

> Got it
> 
> InterScan VirusWall of Trend Micro
> 
> www.trendmicro.fr

Also known as a really easy way to turn your mailserver into an
anonymising open relay.

AB




RE: virus scan for qpopper?

2000-09-28 Thread Admin Mailing Lists

there's a 4th. educate stupid end users.

-Mr. 0 viruses in 8 years with no virus protection, ever.
.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-.
Anthony J. Biacco   Network Administrator/Engineer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Intergrafix Internet Services

"Dream as if you'll live forever, live as if you'll die today"
http://www.asteroid-b612.orghttp://www.intergrafix.net
.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-.

On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Leonard Hermens wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> My .001 cents worth. There are three camps to this. One says prevent 
> viruses via transport (FTP, file sharing, email, etc.) One says protect the 
> desktops individually. The third says do both.
> 
> However, we cannot afford to equip all of our transport mechanisms at $10K 
> a pop. We can protect desktop computers much more inexpensively and manage 
> them just as well. But none of the three detection methods work with new or 
> unknown viruses anyway.
> 
> And I realize that this is way off track from the intent of the Qpopper list.
> 
> -- Leonard
> 
> At 10:20 AM 9/28/2000, InvictaNet Customer Support wrote:
> >At the risk of starting a forest fire, I have to say, Jeff, that I think
> >your response is more than a little childish.
> >
> >The fact is that a virus problem exists and Microsoft are never going to do
> >anything about the "features" in their software that allow these viruses to
> >propagate.
> >
> >You are correct that xnix servers are not directly affected by Microsoft
> >type viruses but even the best mail server can be brought to its knees by
> >the throughput generated by an attack such as "I LOVE YOU".
> >
> >Internet Mail Servers are the best place to stop viruses. In fact, with good
> >planning, I see no reason why virus transfer should not be completely
> >eradicated - If every Internet Mail Server ran anti-virus software, viruses
> >could only ever attack local networks.
> >
> >
> >Martyn Routley
> >-
> >InvictaNet - The Internet in Plain English, Guaranteed
> >http://www.invictanet.co.uk
> >mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >phone: 0870 7402252
> >fax: +44 (0)1233 334001
> >------------------
> >
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Jeff Earickson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 3:14 PM
> >To: Len Conrad
> >Cc: Subscribers of Qpopper
> >Subject: Re: virus scan for qpopper?
> >
> >
> >Y'all,
> >I've tried amavis in the past, and while it works fairly well, virus
> >scanning on a mail hub isn't worth it IMHO.  The CPU cycles needed to
> >break out attachments and run them thru a virus scanner are large, and
> >for all that effort I didn't seem to catch much.  It was a
> >waste of CPU at our site, and I gave up on it.  My opinion is that
> >virii are frankly a Microsoft problem because of the design of their
> >OS and their use of VB scripts.  Microsoft needs to address the problem
> >at their end...
> >
> >--- Jeff Earickson
> 
> 




RE: virus scan for qpopper?

2000-09-28 Thread Leonard Hermens

Hi,

My .001 cents worth. There are three camps to this. One says prevent 
viruses via transport (FTP, file sharing, email, etc.) One says protect the 
desktops individually. The third says do both.

However, we cannot afford to equip all of our transport mechanisms at $10K 
a pop. We can protect desktop computers much more inexpensively and manage 
them just as well. But none of the three detection methods work with new or 
unknown viruses anyway.

And I realize that this is way off track from the intent of the Qpopper list.

-- Leonard

At 10:20 AM 9/28/2000, InvictaNet Customer Support wrote:
>At the risk of starting a forest fire, I have to say, Jeff, that I think
>your response is more than a little childish.
>
>The fact is that a virus problem exists and Microsoft are never going to do
>anything about the "features" in their software that allow these viruses to
>propagate.
>
>You are correct that xnix servers are not directly affected by Microsoft
>type viruses but even the best mail server can be brought to its knees by
>the throughput generated by an attack such as "I LOVE YOU".
>
>Internet Mail Servers are the best place to stop viruses. In fact, with good
>planning, I see no reason why virus transfer should not be completely
>eradicated - If every Internet Mail Server ran anti-virus software, viruses
>could only ever attack local networks.
>
>
>Martyn Routley
>-
>InvictaNet - The Internet in Plain English, Guaranteed
>http://www.invictanet.co.uk
>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>phone: 0870 7402252
>fax: +44 (0)1233 334001
>--
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Jeff Earickson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 3:14 PM
>To: Len Conrad
>Cc: Subscribers of Qpopper
>Subject: Re: virus scan for qpopper?
>
>
>Y'all,
>I've tried amavis in the past, and while it works fairly well, virus
>scanning on a mail hub isn't worth it IMHO.  The CPU cycles needed to
>break out attachments and run them thru a virus scanner are large, and
>for all that effort I didn't seem to catch much.  It was a
>waste of CPU at our site, and I gave up on it.  My opinion is that
>virii are frankly a Microsoft problem because of the design of their
>OS and their use of VB scripts.  Microsoft needs to address the problem
>at their end...
>
>--- Jeff Earickson




RE: virus scan for qpopper?

2000-09-28 Thread InvictaNet Customer Support

At the risk of starting a forest fire, I have to say, Jeff, that I think
your response is more than a little childish.

The fact is that a virus problem exists and Microsoft are never going to do
anything about the "features" in their software that allow these viruses to
propagate.

You are correct that xnix servers are not directly affected by Microsoft
type viruses but even the best mail server can be brought to its knees by
the throughput generated by an attack such as "I LOVE YOU".

Internet Mail Servers are the best place to stop viruses. In fact, with good
planning, I see no reason why virus transfer should not be completely
eradicated - If every Internet Mail Server ran anti-virus software, viruses
could only ever attack local networks.


Martyn Routley
-
InvictaNet - The Internet in Plain English, Guaranteed
http://www.invictanet.co.uk
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
phone: 0870 7402252
fax: +44 (0)1233 334001
--

-Original Message-
From: Jeff Earickson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 3:14 PM
To: Len Conrad
Cc: Subscribers of Qpopper
Subject: Re: virus scan for qpopper?


Y'all,
   I've tried amavis in the past, and while it works fairly well, virus
scanning on a mail hub isn't worth it IMHO.  The CPU cycles needed to
break out attachments and run them thru a virus scanner are large, and
for all that effort I didn't seem to catch much.  It was a
waste of CPU at our site, and I gave up on it.  My opinion is that
virii are frankly a Microsoft problem because of the design of their
OS and their use of VB scripts.  Microsoft needs to address the problem
at their end...

--- Jeff Earickson




Re: virus scan for qpopper?

2000-09-28 Thread Len Conrad

>Got it
>
>InterScan VirusWall of Trend Micro
>
>www.trendmicro.fr

About $25K for the unlimited version, about FFr 150,000.

Len


http://BIND8NT.MEIway.com: ISC BIND 8.2.2 p5  installable binary for NT4
http://IMGate.MEIway.com:  Build free, hi-perf, anti-spam mail gateways




Re: virus scan for qpopper?

2000-09-28 Thread penda paul

Got it

InterScan VirusWall of Trend Micro

www.trendmicro.fr

Paul


>From: Jeff Earickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Len Conrad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CC: Subscribers of Qpopper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: virus scan for qpopper?
>Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:13:38 -0400 (EDT)
>
>Y'all,
>I've tried amavis in the past, and while it works fairly well, virus
>scanning on a mail hub isn't worth it IMHO.  The CPU cycles needed to
>break out attachments and run them thru a virus scanner are large, and
>for all that effort I didn't seem to catch much.  It was a
>waste of CPU at our site, and I gave up on it.  My opinion is that
>virii are frankly a Microsoft problem because of the design of their
>OS and their use of VB scripts.  Microsoft needs to address the problem
>at their end...
>
>--- Jeff Earickson
>
>On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Len Conrad wrote:
>
> > Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 14:49:43 +0200
> > From: Len Conrad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: Subscribers of Qpopper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Re: virus scan for qpopper?
> >
> > >Hi all,
> > >Anyone know of software to scan emails for viruses as they are 
>processed
> > >out to the user by qpopper?  Or I suppose as they come in through 
>sendmail
> > >for that matter?
> >
> > SMTP would be a better protocol to scan.  check
> >
> > http://sourceforge.net/projects/amavis/
> >
> > and
> >
> > http://www.kaspersky.com/products.asp?tgroup=0&pgroup=3&id=34
> >
> > Len
> >
> > http://BIND8NT.MEIway.com: ISC BIND 8.2.2 p5  installable binary for NT4
> > http://IMGate.MEIway.com:  Build free, hi-perf, anti-spam mail gateways
> >
>

_
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.




Re: virus scan for qpopper?

2000-09-28 Thread Jeff Earickson

Y'all,
   I've tried amavis in the past, and while it works fairly well, virus
scanning on a mail hub isn't worth it IMHO.  The CPU cycles needed to
break out attachments and run them thru a virus scanner are large, and
for all that effort I didn't seem to catch much.  It was a
waste of CPU at our site, and I gave up on it.  My opinion is that
virii are frankly a Microsoft problem because of the design of their
OS and their use of VB scripts.  Microsoft needs to address the problem
at their end...

--- Jeff Earickson

On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Len Conrad wrote:

> Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 14:49:43 +0200
> From: Len Conrad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Subscribers of Qpopper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: virus scan for qpopper?
> 
> >Hi all,
> >Anyone know of software to scan emails for viruses as they are processed
> >out to the user by qpopper?  Or I suppose as they come in through sendmail
> >for that matter?
> 
> SMTP would be a better protocol to scan.  check
> 
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/amavis/
> 
> and
> 
> http://www.kaspersky.com/products.asp?tgroup=0&pgroup=3&id=34
> 
> Len
> 
> http://BIND8NT.MEIway.com: ISC BIND 8.2.2 p5  installable binary for NT4
> http://IMGate.MEIway.com:  Build free, hi-perf, anti-spam mail gateways
> 




Re: virus scan for qpopper?

2000-09-28 Thread Len Conrad

>Hi all,
>Anyone know of software to scan emails for viruses as they are processed
>out to the user by qpopper?  Or I suppose as they come in through sendmail
>for that matter?

SMTP would be a better protocol to scan.  check

http://sourceforge.net/projects/amavis/

and

http://www.kaspersky.com/products.asp?tgroup=0&pgroup=3&id=34

Len

http://BIND8NT.MEIway.com: ISC BIND 8.2.2 p5  installable binary for NT4
http://IMGate.MEIway.com:  Build free, hi-perf, anti-spam mail gateways