Re: Reducing Load on Amavisd-new/Spamassassin/Antivir
From: Roger Grosswiler (roger_at_gwch.net)
Date: 03/02/05
- Previous message: Ryan McDougall: "Screen Locking Problems"
- In reply to: Alexander Dalloz: "Re: Reducing Load on Amavisd-new/Spamassassin/Antivir"
- Next in thread: Alexander Dalloz: "Re: Reducing Load on Amavisd-new/Spamassassin/Antivir"
- Reply: Alexander Dalloz: "Re: Reducing Load on Amavisd-new/Spamassassin/Antivir"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 21:14:32 +0100 To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
Alexander Dalloz schrieb:
> Am Mi, den 02.03.2005 schrieb Dale Sykora um 18:00:
>
>
>>Alexander,
>> This thread caused an idea to pop into my head. What if virus scanners
>>would digitally sign outgoing messages as virus free such that incoming
>>mail handlers could verify the message+signatures and not have to scan
>>for virii? Then active lists like fedora-list could scan once at the
>>server and all the recipients would only have to check the signature.
>
>
>>Dale
>
>
> The idea is not that bad, to rely on a trusted central virus scanning
> service. On the other hand, while speaking about mailing list, I would
> really wish all would catch out virus / worm mails and not let them go
> through to the subscribers, rather than to just tag them as clean or
> infected. Red Hat handles this pretty well I feel while for instance
> through the Cyrus lists spam and I think even worms are getting through.
> The problem with your idea about tagging mail as clean is that "the bad
> side" will fake such signatures. So in general it is no good idea to
> trust mail header tags in general like mail body signature strings.
> While saying that, I believe to remember that DSPAM is using signatures.
> But as I never used that tool I can't say how they operate with them and
> how reliable such a sig is.
>
> Alexander
>
>
>
Hi guys,
First, thanks a lot for the interest in this thread.
i remember some times on the samba-list, when some worms where around, i
had about 75 viruses PER HOUR. And they did not filter anything....
so, i do my very best to answer all your questions:
1) i don't use clam, i use antivir (h+b edv)
2) the machine is a old p3/866 mhz with 128 mb ram only, running fc3 (a
granny machine...)
3) mail quantity is about 300-400 per day. Average use is according to
tload between 0.90 and 3.50 (peaks) avg about 1.3 *ouch*
4) spamassassin is running as daemon (3 childprocesses)
5) amavisd-new is running as dameon (3 childprocesses)
Roger
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
- Previous message: Ryan McDougall: "Screen Locking Problems"
- In reply to: Alexander Dalloz: "Re: Reducing Load on Amavisd-new/Spamassassin/Antivir"
- Next in thread: Alexander Dalloz: "Re: Reducing Load on Amavisd-new/Spamassassin/Antivir"
- Reply: Alexander Dalloz: "Re: Reducing Load on Amavisd-new/Spamassassin/Antivir"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|