On 14/10/16 14:44, Axb wrote:
On 10/14/2016 03:40 PM, Paul Stead wrote:
On 14/10/16 14:11, Axb wrote:
How's the performance. I know you run hi traffic sites.
Have you felt a difference?
Thanx
Axb
From the week or so of testing, things seem to be efficient and quick -
not to say there's not efficiencies that could be made with this code.
No discernible difference in scanning time, memory or CPU used.
Here's an example from HitFreqsRuleTiming:
T OLEMACRO_ZIP_PW 0.0112 0.0112 1
T OLEMACRO_RENAME 0.0000 0.0000 1
T OLEMACRO_MALICE 0.0000 0.0000 1
T OLEMACRO_ENCRYPTED 0.0000 0.0000 1
T OLEMACRO 0.0000 0.0000 1
sounds good.
running on a trap box with a nice traffic level.
Hoping to see hits soon
Axb
The above is an email with files that match for scanning - ie worst case
scenario. In most cases the files won't match for scanning - this looks
more like the following :
T OLEMACRO_ZIP_PW 0.0002 0.0002 1
T OLEMACRO_RENAME 0.0000 0.0000 1
T OLEMACRO_MALICE 0.0000 0.0000 1
T OLEMACRO_ENCRYPTED 0.0000 0.0000 1
T OLEMACRO 0.0000 0.0000 1
Ta
--
Paul Stead
Systems Engineer
Zen Internet
