Re: amavis or qmail-scanner ?

2001-03-01 Thread Rainer Link

Jrmy Cluzel wrote:

 1) as virus-scanner ? amavis or qmail-scanner ? both seem to work
 fine...
I've replied to you directly and added Jason Haar into CC, so he can
correct me if I made a wrong assumption. :-) Hopefully I do not need a
dozen of bodyguards ;-)))

 2) as antivirus ? H+BEDV AntiVir, AVP, Sophos Sweep,or McAfee
 ViruScan ? I used avp for a while (and I find it very efficient), but
 doesn't know the other ones...
Well, Kaspersky Labs ships Kaspersky AntiVirus (AVP) for qmail. For a
product comparison please visit www.av-test.org - they do comparisons of
Linux products, too.

HTH

best regards,
Rainer Link

-- 
Rainer Link  | Member of Virus Help Munich (www.vhm.haitec.de)   
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Member of AMaViS Development Team (amavis.org) 
rainer.w3.to | OpenAntiVirus Project (www.openantivirus.org)




amavis or qmail-scanner ?

2001-02-28 Thread Jérémy Cluzel




Hi,I was using Red Hat 6.2, and qmail as 
Mta.My goal is to take virus aware from my mail server, so, what's the best 
choice ?
1) as virus-scanner ? amavis or qmail-scanner ? 
both seem to workfine...2) as antivirus ? H+BEDV AntiVir, AVP, 
Sophos Sweep,or McAfee ViruScan ? I used avp for a while (and I find it very 
efficient), butdoesn't know the other ones...thanks in 
advance...
RegardsJeremy 
Cluzel


Re: [Qmail-scanner-general]amavis or qmail-scanner ?

2001-02-28 Thread Alex at messagelabs

2) as antivirus ? H+BEDV AntiVir, AVP, Sophos Sweep,or McAfee ViruScan ? I used avp 
for a while
(and I find it very efficient), but doesn't know the other ones...

Don't know about H+BEDV AntiVir

McAfee is currently best for detecting new viruses, and has been for a while
AVP is also good at this

McAfee, AVP and Sweep are all good at detecting known viruses
McAfee, AVP and Sweep all have few false positives

Consider issues also like support and ability to update easily, which I can't
help you with.

Alex
~
Alex Shipp
Imagineer
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
T: +44 1285 884496
M: 07899 937132
T: 01285 884496


___
This message has been checked for all known viruses by the 
MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information visit
http://www.messagelabs.com/stats.asp



Re: [Qmail-scanner-general]amavis or qmail-scanner ?

2001-02-28 Thread Jérémy Cluzel

and wath about scanners ? which is the best one ? and why ?
are they really needed for such antivirus ?
I've heard that some AV (live avp) have their own scanner (which tends to
replace amavis or qmail scanner).

- Original Message -
From: "Alex at messagelabs" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: [Qmail-scanner-general]amavis or qmail-scanner ?


 2) as antivirus ? H+BEDV AntiVir, AVP, Sophos Sweep,or McAfee ViruScan ?
I used avp for a while
 (and I find it very efficient), but doesn't know the other ones...

 Don't know about H+BEDV AntiVir

 McAfee is currently best for detecting new viruses, and has been for a
while
 AVP is also good at this

 McAfee, AVP and Sweep are all good at detecting known viruses
 McAfee, AVP and Sweep all have few false positives

 Consider issues also like support and ability to update easily, which I
can't
 help you with.

 Alex
 ~
 Alex Shipp
 Imagineer
 E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 T: +44 1285 884496
 M: 07899 937132
 T: 01285 884496


 ___
 This message has been checked for all known viruses by the
 MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information visit
 http://www.messagelabs.com/stats.asp




Re: [Qmail-scanner-general]amavis or qmail-scanner ?

2001-02-28 Thread Bruno Wolff III

On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 11:23:20AM +0100,
  Jrmy Cluzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 and wath about scanners ? which is the best one ? and why ?
 are they really needed for such antivirus ?
 I've heard that some AV (live avp) have their own scanner (which tends to
 replace amavis or qmail scanner).

I my opinion, doing the virus scanning on the mail server is a waste of
resources. It doesn't fully protect the people/systems that need protection
and it wastes resources protecting people/systems that don't need protection.

For people/systems that need antivirus protection, get something on their
desktop that can guard (as well as antvivirus stuff can) against files
entering the system by email, web downloads, portable media and file sharing.
Have something in place to automatically do updates (availability of updates
should be checked daily) from a local mirror. (You don't want to get stuff
directly from the antivirus people as they screw up once in a while and the
updates should be tested for your environment before being used.)



RE: [Qmail-scanner-general]amavis or qmail-scanner ?

2001-02-28 Thread Michael Peppard

I absolutely disagree.

You guys remember those Outlook bugs a few months ago?  We didn't have one
get in here, although I was returning dozens of rejected mails to other
companies that got hit.  Given how hard it is to arrange timely upgrading
of desktop antivirus software over an enterprise on every computer, I'm not
terribly surprised that the other companies got hit.

I am not saying that desktop virus detectors are not important, they are
very
important *too.  The operative word is too.  Use both, but check the
statistics on
how many viruses are getting sent by email first - just to check my
reasoning out.

A good mail checker that gets updated multi-daily will keep bugs out
extremely
effectively.  With windoze you take your chances with viruses, if you just
use a
desktop scanner - face it the operating system is riddled with holes that
have
to be filled almost hourly :)

(My favorite is Sophos with-in qmail, I LIKE IT, but this letter isn't meant
to
be a plug.)

Cheers
-Mike

-Original Message-
From: Bruno Wolff III [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 8:59 AM
To: Jrmy Cluzel
Cc: Qmail cr.yp.to
Subject: Re: [Qmail-scanner-general]amavis or qmail-scanner ?


On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 11:23:20AM +0100,
  Jrmy Cluzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 and wath about scanners ? which is the best one ? and why ?
 are they really needed for such antivirus ?
 I've heard that some AV (live avp) have their own scanner (which tends to
 replace amavis or qmail scanner).

I my opinion, doing the virus scanning on the mail server is a waste of
resources. It doesn't fully protect the people/systems that need protection
and it wastes resources protecting people/systems that don't need
protection.

For people/systems that need antivirus protection, get something on their
desktop that can guard (as well as antvivirus stuff can) against files
entering the system by email, web downloads, portable media and file
sharing.
Have something in place to automatically do updates (availability of updates
should be checked daily) from a local mirror. (You don't want to get stuff
directly from the antivirus people as they screw up once in a while and the
updates should be tested for your environment before being used.)




RE: [Qmail-scanner-general]amavis or qmail-scanner ?

2001-02-28 Thread marcth

Well,

I agree wholeheartedly, it's a must to have the desktop covered, but if
you don't try to catch the virii coming in, you'll never have any idea  
about what comes in by mail, as most users will soon not tell you about
it anymore.
I use amavis on the internet connected systems, and inflex on the inside
where I still run sendmail due to the way we distribute the mail to
different servers.
Both use mcafee, and I get a warning the moment something suspicious is
sent by email.
If there's a wave of virii coming in, which has happened, I know what's
going on, I can block that site even, if I want to.

On the other hand, if something happens on a machine that isn't
protected, and something bad gets sent, it'll quite likely get caught
before it goes out onto the 'net. Currently there is no liability on that,
but what if there is ? A mailicious user is all it takes. How many
companies will be happy about being the source of a new virus ?

It doesn't cost me anything extra, we're not that large, it's all
automated and well within the machines' capabilities.
If you can do it, it'll save you lots of worries and work. especially if
your users barely know how to work their machines, let alone handle a
virus warning message :-)

I get at least 2 or more warnings a day on stuff that gets caught, I
think that's been worth the trouble of setting things up.

Marc




amavis or qmail-scanner ?

2001-02-28 Thread Jérémy Cluzel

Hi,

I was using Red Hat 6.2, and qmail as Mta.
My goal is to take virus aware from my mail server, so, what's the 
best choice ?

1) as virus-scanner ? amavis or qmail-scanner ? both seem to work 
fine...

2) as antivirus ? H+BEDV AntiVir, AVP, Sophos Sweep,or McAfee 
ViruScan ? I used avp for a while (and I find it very efficient), but 
doesn't know the other ones...

thanks in advance...

Regards

Jeremy Cluzel

--
Votre email partout et gratuit ! http://www.alinto.com



Re: amavis or qmail-scanner ?

2001-02-28 Thread Olivier M.

On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 03:58:51PM -, Jrmy Cluzel wrote:
 My goal is to take virus aware from my mail server, so, what's the 
 best choice ?

there are no "best choice"  : there are just different solutions :)

All that I can tell you is that qmail-scanner + f-sav is a very
good working solution. But I never tried anything elso, so
YMMV :)

Olivier

-- 
_
 Olivier Mueller - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - PGPkeyID: 0E84D2EA - Switzerland
qmail projects: http://omail.omnis.ch  -  http://webmail.omnis.ch

 PGP signature


RE: amavis or qmail-scanner ?

2001-02-28 Thread schoon

Jeremy,

I tried installing qmai-scanner and had some difficulty with the setuid
root issues. qmail-scanner was wanting a new kernel built, which I can't
easily do as it's a remote server. I switched to amavis and think that's
a better solution. It's easy to install and essentially works by
'slipping' into the process of qmail operation. Plus, you don't need to
patch qmail for the queue as well. I don't understand all the internals
of qmail, I've been using it for about a month so I can't arque which
way is one is better. Also, keep in mind that amavis/qmail-scanner are
NOT virus scanners, but are essentially 'wrappers' to run a regular
virus scanner like NAI, Sophos, etc. I use AMaVis with Sophos and have
been happy with the performance.

HTH

.mark


--
From:  Jrmy Cluzel[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:  Wednesday, February 28, 2001 7:58 AM
To:qmail
Subject:   amavis or qmail-scanner ?

Hi,

I was using Red Hat 6.2, and qmail as Mta.
My goal is to take virus aware from my mail server, so, what's the 
best choice ?

1) as virus-scanner ? amavis or qmail-scanner ? both seem to work 
fine...

2) as antivirus ? H+BEDV AntiVir, AVP, Sophos Sweep,or McAfee 
ViruScan ? I used avp for a while (and I find it very efficient), but 
doesn't know the other ones...

thanks in advance...

Regards

Jeremy Cluzel

--
Votre email partout et gratuit ! http://www.alinto.com




Re: amavis or qmail-scanner ?

2001-02-28 Thread Jason Haar

On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 09:34:57AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Jeremy,
 
   I tried installing qmai-scanner and had some difficulty with the setuid
 root issues. qmail-scanner was wanting a new kernel built, which I can't

Err - I can emphatically state that neither Qmail-Scanner or AmaVis require
"new kernels" to work. Your problem was with perl - not with the OS

 way is one is better. Also, keep in mind that amavis/qmail-scanner are
 NOT virus scanners, but are essentially 'wrappers' to run a regular
 virus scanner like NAI, Sophos, etc. 

Absolutely correct :-)

-- 
Cheers

Jason Haar

Unix/Special Projects, Trimble NZ
Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417



Re: [Qmail-scanner-general]amavis or qmail-scanner ?

2001-02-28 Thread Brett Randall

I have a lot of trigger-happy users who seem to enjoy double
clicking attachments. Most of the time, a few hours after a major
virus is discovered, we have an update made, but in the meanwhile we
could have had hundreds of e-mails come in with the virus.

Our environment runs Windows, and we find that by stripping any
attachments that could be double-clicked on and contain a virus (ie
vbs, scr, exe soon when I can convince management). I use
qmail-scanner for this. It also helps us to monitor e-mail usage and
see who are the people wasting all our bandwidth sending MPGs, AVIs,
MP3s, etc, and take the necessary disciplinary action.

Since neither amavis nor qmail-scanner are REALLY virii scanners
(they just spawn scanners), I prefer qmail-scanner since it offers
the ability to block attachment types as well. Of course, we also
run Norton Antivirus across all our desktops. With the corporate
edition, its really easy to install. Open up your MMC, go
Tools...Client Install, select the 100 workstations in the building,
hit Go, and it installs the virii scanning software across all of
our workstations, and they all pull the latest updates off our
central NAV server whenever new ones arrive.

Of course I've moved OT now...

Brett.
-- 
"I'm not dumb. I just have a command of throughly useless
information."

- Calvin, of Calvin and Hobbes



amavis or qmail-scanner ?

2001-02-26 Thread Jérémy Cluzel

Hi,

I was using Red Hat 6.2, and qmail as Mta.
My goal is to take virus aware from my mail server, so, what's the 
best choice ?

1) as virus-scanner ? amavis or qmail-scanner ? both seem to work 
fine...

2) as antivirus ? H+BEDV AntiVir, AVP, Sophos Sweep,or McAfee 
ViruScan ? I used avp for a while (and I find it very efficient), but 
doesn't know the other ones...

thanks in advance...

Regards

Jeremy Cluzel

--
Votre email partout et gratuit ! http://www.alinto.com