On Fri, Aug 13, 1999 at 02:22:51PM -0300,
Eric Dahnke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Virus scanning should be done on the client machine
> This is complete counter logic in my opnion. How can anyone argue that
> anit-virus installations, scans, and updates are better done all client
> machines when a single installation, scan, and update point is available
> on the server?
Because there are generally a lot more free cycles on the end user machine
than on the mail server. Not all messages that go through the main servers
will normally need to be checked. Some users may not want to bother having
virus scans done at all since they won't be running any programs sent to them
(including active documents).
> > Viruses are being increasingly sent as encrypted msgs
> Ok, you're got an arguement against server based scanning there, but the
> question is; If the virus intially comes out in a pgp message, it will
> not be propagated in an encrypted format if the people that resend don't
> use pgp. Or an I wrong there?
I believe there were two parts to this. One is that people will start getting
more encrypted email. This email can't be effectively scanned because the
server has no way to read it. The second part is that virus writers can be
expected to start using encryption to make detecting viruses with pattern
matching more difficult. This allow with the continual increase in the number
of viruses will mean that as time goes on, checking for viruses is going to
be more resource intensive and that in the long run other approaches should
be used.
