On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 05:01:14PM +0200, Jonas Eckerman wrote:
Steven W. Orr wrote:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/ClamAVPlugin
It looks like what I thought I wanted already exists. Based on what I wrote
above, and that I like the result of running sa + clamav via the two
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 12:01:35PM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 10.07.09 19:09, Henrik K wrote:
When you block botnets directly from MTA (zen, helo checks, greylist etc),
possible ClamAV/SA load is already reduced by a huge factor. Personally I
only see handful of official
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 12:01:35PM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 10.07.09 19:09, Henrik K wrote:
When you block botnets directly from MTA (zen, helo checks, greylist etc),
possible ClamAV/SA load is already reduced by a huge factor. Personally I
only see handful of
Steven W. Orr wrote:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/ClamAVPlugin
It looks like what I thought I wanted already exists. Based on what I wrote
above, and that I like the result of running sa + clamav via the two milters,
does anyone have any caveats for me?
1: When running ClamAV inside
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 05:01:14PM +0200, Jonas Eckerman wrote:
Steven W. Orr wrote:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/ClamAVPlugin
It looks like what I thought I wanted already exists. Based on what I wrote
above, and that I like the result of running sa + clamav via the two milters,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/04/09 13:56, quoth Steven W. Orr:
I think I have a problem. Maybe not, but I'd like to hear what other people
think.
I have a small home server running sendmail, spamassassin, spamass-milter and
clamav-milter. The clamav helped a lot but
