Re: [Mimedefang] case of multiple virus scanners running
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005, Keith Patton wrote: Am I right to assume that if a mail message contains multiple attachments that mimedefang could spawn off a virus scan for each attachment? Not unless you do that deliberately in your filter. And even so, they'd be sequential scans, not parallel ones. -- David. ___ Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca MIMEDefang mailing list MIMEDefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
RE: [Mimedefang] case of multiple virus scanners running
Interesting question... Has made me think I currently have the system set for different modes of operation depending on certain factors drop entire or drop part in the drop entire, I scan the msg in filter_begin, and drop it if it contains a virus in drop part, I scan the msg in filter_begin to see if it contains a virus, (make a note if it's clean or not) If it's not clean i then scan each individual part so i can drop the offending part (reason for doing this is that scanning every part of every msg uses a lot of resources and takes more time with 3 virus engines running) if it's marked as clean by the filter_begin scan I don't bother scanning the individual parts. Am i likely to let anything slip through by doing this ? or is there a better way of doing it ? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David F. Skoll Sent: Wednesday 16 February 2005 12:23 To: mimedefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com Subject: Re: [Mimedefang] case of multiple virus scanners running On Tue, 15 Feb 2005, Keith Patton wrote: Am I right to assume that if a mail message contains multiple attachments that mimedefang could spawn off a virus scan for each attachment? Not unless you do that deliberately in your filter. And even so, they'd be sequential scans, not parallel ones. -- David. ___ Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca MIMEDefang mailing list MIMEDefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang This Email Has Been Anti-Virus Scanned ___ Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca MIMEDefang mailing list MIMEDefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
Re: [Mimedefang] case of multiple virus scanners running
If mimedefang creates sequential scans, then I had some orphan scan processes...I'll go off in that direction.. thanks David, Keith David F. Skoll wrote: On Tue, 15 Feb 2005, Keith Patton wrote: Am I right to assume that if a mail message contains multiple attachments that mimedefang could spawn off a virus scan for each attachment? Not unless you do that deliberately in your filter. And even so, they'd be sequential scans, not parallel ones. -- David. ___ Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca MIMEDefang mailing list MIMEDefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang ___ Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca MIMEDefang mailing list MIMEDefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
[Mimedefang] case of multiple virus scanners running
All, I had the case were multiple instances of the virus scanner was running with only 2 sendmail processes, the load average went real high stopped sendmail and the virus scanner could not run either because all were waiting on more memory.. Lovely deadlock here... Anyway... Am I right to assume that if a mail message contains multiple attachments that mimedefang could spawn off a virus scan for each attachment? Therefore, if a spammer sent in a message with x attachments at some point he could kill my server So, is there a way to limit how many I will spawn off at one time? thanks, Keith ___ Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca MIMEDefang mailing list MIMEDefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
