On 8 May 2007 at 16:02, Kevin wrote:

> Pardon the delay on this reply.

no probs :)

> Those are possible causes however I was referring to the fact that the 
> scanning engine was changed a few months ago to enable scanning for 
> more/different types of viruses, the developers themselves admitted that 
> this introduces a nasty performance hit and they were working on it.
> I however have not kept up on the ClamAV development so I can not say 
> for certain if this has been fixed.

The default for recent builds is to enable the anti-phising scan (similar to 
URIBL), but it can be turned off.

> I also base it on the fact that clamd uses around 100% cpu when scanning 
> a file, however on my exchange server ScanMail uses very little, and I 
> guarantee that ScanMail scans more messages since you can't tell it not 
> to scan.

Ah, never seen that sort of peak.  Sounds suspicious to me.

> 
> >> if you have a 
> >> large volume of email I would recommend keeping an exchange integrated 
> >> virus scanner, personally I use Trend Micro at the moment but if I were 
> >> to building a new server/switch I would definitely go with nod32.
> > 
> > OOI, what would be the reasons for going with NOD?
> 
> Performance, it's not Symantec/Mcafee, I don't like the latest version 
> of the Trend product,  I am throughly impressed with the Nod32 desktop 
> scanning product, and the vast amount of recommendations I see for it on 
> other lists.

Thanks - useful.

paul


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Assp-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user

Reply via email to