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.
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
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
I can say the same thing, David.
I use it, and it scores many hits per day (in addition to other antivirus
engines that I run). But I have received no complaints from users, though I
have not reviewed anything it flagged.
I like the idea of --enable-filescan during configure.
Ken
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Cormack, Ken wrote:
I like the idea of --enable-filescan during configure.
I don't like that idea. I'd rather have it so you put this in your
filter:
use File::Scan;
$Features{File::Scan} = 1;
to enable it. Putting too much in configure makes life
Hello all,
I thought I saw a excerpt on this list on a method to only virus scan
files smaller than a certain size... ( assuming that large files are ok )
And can't find it anywhere.. Does anyone have a filter to do such?
thanks,
Keith
___
Visit
David F. Skoll wrote:
Hi,
Does anyone use File::Scan with MIMEDefang? It seems to cause a lot
of problems with false positives.
For the next release, I'm considering removing the auto-detection
of File::Scan. In other words, if you want File::Scan, you'll have to
specifically ask for it in your
That's cool. I see your point.
-Original Message-
From: David F. Skoll [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 8:47 AM
To: 'mimedefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com'
Subject: RE: [Mimedefang] Anyone using File::Scan?
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Cormack, Ken wrote:
I like
Le Mercredi 16 Février 2005 15:20, Keith Patton a écrit :
Hello all,
I thought I saw a excerpt on this list on a method to only virus scan
files smaller than a certain size... ( assuming that large files are ok )
And can't find it anywhere.. Does anyone have a filter to do such?
Here
-Original Message-
From: alan premselaar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 9:25 AM
To: mimedefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com
Subject: Re: [Mimedefang] Anyone using File::Scan?
::SNIP::
I think the change would be good, because up until now, if File::Scan is
I do, but would love to replace it with something better as long as that
something is still free :-)
- Original Message -
From: David F. Skoll [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: mimedefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 8:46 PM
Subject: [Mimedefang] Anyone using File::Scan?
On Wednesday 16 February 2005 15:50, Dave Williss wrote:
I do, but would love to replace it with something better as long as that
something is still free :-)
well, ClamAV is GPL and faster anyway and detects many thousands more viruses.
Dirk
___
On 2/15/2005 8:46 PM, David F. Skoll wrote:
Does anyone use File::Scan with MIMEDefang? It seems to cause a lot
of problems with false positives.
I've never noticed or heard of any false positives until now. I've
never had to ask the maintainer for anything, either, so I can't speak
to his/her
http://www.forbes.com/2005/02/16/cx_ah_0216tentech.html?partner=technology_newsletter
I think you're all ugly and your momma's dress you funny.
Filter that. ;)
Notice how it presently only seems to work with Exchange.
In a way, that infers that only us intelligent folks use behemoth's like
David + list,
Just like to add my $0.02AU (I know, not very much indeed!).
I'm currently using File::Scan on three MD installations, and have not had a
reported false positive, but as the majority of respondants have said, I
don't monitor closely exactly _what_ is getting rejected due to virii
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Matt Smith wrote:
Hello,
don't monitor closely exactly _what_ is getting rejected due to virii (I
I drop the part with warning when File::Scan returns positive, so the
recipient may decide further. Till now, I had no single complaint. But we
do not scan thousands of mails
16 matches
Mail list logo
