I'm using Untangle in my network but I prefer not to use Anti-Spam feature of the same. Instead I use SPAMDYKE on my QMT server.
Regards, Amit At Monday, 02-08-2010 on 4:15 Patrick Ring wrote: I have often felt Untangle needed a bit more cpu than most appliances should, but I've been pleased with it on my office-only network which is why I asked what some here may think. I guess this confirms my feelings that Untangle is best suited for a small-med business firewall and content control appliance than just a dedicated SPAM/virus filter. As for Spamdyke, I figured it would be best suited to function directly on the permimeter of the mail network (because of what it does). Would you suggest putting Spamdyke on a dedicated box that relays mail in, or just run it on my QMT boxes directly? I'm not familiar with IPCop at all. I'll have to look at what it does. Thanks, Patrick M. Ring P. Ring Technologies Louisiana Web Host, LLC. 985-868-4200 -----Original Message----- From: Eric Shubert [mailto:e...@shubes.net] Sent: Sunday, August 01, 2010 4:47 PM To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com Subject: [qmailtoaster] Re: Does anyone on QMT use Untangle? Patrick Ring wrote: > I'm needing to tighten my gateways . In particular against SPAM. > > I know there has been a lot of talk here about the Spamdyke software, > but I'm also looking at the virus protection side too (even though > Clam is in QMT). > > Since I successfully run Untangle infront of my M$ Exchange boxes, I > was considering it for QMT. > Does anyone here have experience with QMT behind an Untangle server? > Is there anything I should be aware of? > > Thank you, > Patrick M. Ring > P. Ring Technologies > Louisiana Web Host, LLC. > 985-868-4200 > I took a look at untangle a year or two ago. It's flashy and has a slick interface, which unfortunately causes it to require more hardware to run on than is generally needed for a router. I also don't think that anti-spam software in general is suited to a router host/appliance. I prefer running IPCop in front of QMT, which I do regularly. I expect that spamdyke with QMT (and spamassassin) will catch every bit as much and probably more spam than untangle or even postini would. If you want to beef up virus detection, I would suggest augmenting or replacing clamav with a commercial AV offering such as ESET or Kaspersky. I believe that ESET can be easily integrated with QMT during the delivery phase. I'm not sure about Kaspersky or others. You should realize that spamdyke is only effective when it's "on the edge", communicating directly with the sending server. Putting a device which handles the smtp session from the sender in front of spamdyke will defeat most of spamdyke's effectiveness. HTH. -- -Eric 'shubes' ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------- Qmailtoaster is sponsored by Vickers Consulting Group (www.vickersconsulting.com) Vickers Consulting Group offers Qmailtoaster support and installations. If you need professional help with your setup, contact them today! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------- Please visit qmailtoaster.com for the latest news, updates, and packages. To unsubscribe, e-mail: qmailtoaster-list-unsubscr...@qmailtoaster.com For additional commands, e-mail: qmailtoaster-list-h...@qmailtoaster.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Qmailtoaster is sponsored by Vickers Consulting Group (www.vickersconsulting.com) Vickers Consulting Group offers Qmailtoaster support and installations. If you need professional help with your setup, contact them today! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please visit qmailtoaster.com for the latest news, updates, and packages. To unsubscribe, e-mail: qmailtoaster-list-unsubscr...@qmailtoaster.com For additional commands, e-mail: qmailtoaster-list-h...@qmailtoaster.com
