Re: alternatives to qmail-scanner

[Brian Clark]

Toni Mueller wrote:

thanks for this collection... I've never used one of these, but several
options on how to scale qmail-ldap and scanning come to mind, eg.
running the scanner(s) on different machines.

So far you only seem to address the load generated by qmail-scanner,
not the one generated by the scanners themselves. Did you determine
that qmail-scanner is responsible for significant enough load to
warrant replacing it?

Best,
--Toni++

Right. The overhead that is caused by qmail-scanner and the Perl intepreter is higher than I'd like it to be. However, the scanner itself is also causing a higher than desired load. I am looking at both issues. I currently use McAfee, and it works well, but there is no daemonized version available. I am currently investigating ClamAV, as it does have a daemonized version available. If that works, I will use that. If that fails, I will look at Sophos Sweep/Sophie.

I am probably going to first replace McAfee with ClamAV and run that for a while with qmail-scanner to see how it goes. Once I am comfortable with ClamAV, I will look at replacing qmail-scanner with something else. In my mind, the leading candidate is simscan.

Thanks,
Brian!

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature