ChangeAuditor for Exchange by NetPro can do most of what you want.
Regards,
Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL
Need some thoughts on anti-virus scanning.
If all email is scanned at the gateway, is it still advisable to have
scanning software for the information store? I'm thinking that while
it adds more depth to the protection, it really doesn't do much unless
it uses different engines than the
You need both. You want to catch what you can at the gateway, but
whatever slips by the gateway and into the store can be caught when
definitions are updated. Otherwise, new viruses could get past the
gateway undetected and you would never find them without store scanning.
JMHO
Bob Fronk
IS scanning will also catch output from an infected client that did not come in
through the gateway.
-
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
- Original Message -
From: Bob Fronk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Correct.
If DNS is not set up properly to indicate and segregate servers sites; then
you could get arbitrary GC/DC servers in use. Definitely non-optimal.
I don't see any reason to leave the FSMO role holder out of the list, but
you know your environment best.
I would specify AT LEAST two.
Both, and use different vendors for each system. I had one slip past the
gateway AV but get caught by the Exchange server.
From: Roger Wright [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 9:14 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: A/V Scanning
Need some thoughts on anti-virus
Even if you use the same vendor, there's still a chance that the A/V
patterns might be updated after arrival at the gateway and before the
recipient tries to access the email.
My votes is for both, and multiple scan engines on both gateway and
information store.
Cheers,
Phil
--
Phil Randal
The only reason NOT to do both is if you have some very large stores
with very large mailbox item counts. VSAPI scanning can start to be a
performance problem in those environments.
For environments with reasonable quotas - no reason not to scan at every level.
On 11/7/08, Randal, Phil [EMAIL
I agree. Also you want to catch anything that a user may bring in, say
on a laptop, that send internally.
From: Bob Fronk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 9:28 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: A/V Scanning
You need both. You want to catch what you
Thanks for the pointers, all. Sounds like dual protection is the way to
go.
Roger Wright
Network Administrator
Evatone, Inc.
727.572.7076 x388
_
From: Roger Wright [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 9:14 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject:
Hey all,
Clients wants to track what domain admins or users with sufficient
rights to view mailboxes are actually viewing. Problem is that I can
see that x user connected to y mailbox via the event viewer, but I
cannot tell them what x user viewed in y mailbox.
Is their any 3rd party or
We actually do 3 - 1 at the gateway, different one on the IS with
multiple engines and a 3rd for desktop/server file systems.
From: Roger Wright [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 7:53 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: A/V
We do gateway, server, and client scanning.
If you're not checking it, it's probably getting infected.
Thanks,
Jake Gardner
TTC Network Administrator
Ext. 246
From: Roger Wright [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 10:53 AM
To:
We're trying to install intrust, but due to the number of apps on the
server, we keep having issues with non-paged pooled memory(sp?). It's the
straw that keeps crashing the win2k3/exch2k3 servers.. Exch 2007, on our
Win2008 servers, rock solid.
On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 5:20 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You've eliminated Server 2003 SP2 SNP (TCP chimney) as a cause, right?
On 11/7/08, Eric Woodford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We're trying to install intrust, but due to the number of apps on the
server, we keep having issues with non-paged pooled memory(sp?). It's the
straw that keeps crashing
Thanks Michael, I will see the cost on it and if they want to implement
that.
Greg
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 8:30 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange Monitoring
ChangeAuditor for Exchange by NetPro can do most
I would like to mention that I recently found out that this customer
is using BIND for ALL DNS.
It appears that BIND isnt not currently setup to support AD, this is
the first step we are doing to resolve some if not a lot of issues.
Hey looky#1 hit on the almighty Google for bind for
17 matches
Mail list logo
