Hi Richard, > Anyone care to comment on how successful/effective this particular product > is? (http://www.barracudanetworks.com) > > There is something of a major dispute going regarding whether this > represents better value for mney than other solutions (including our own, > self built service)
I've been using a "Barracuda SPAM Firewall 200" for the last 14 months. I use it to protect several different servers on various networks. Despite having the Barracuda I still run MailScanner with Clam AV and SpamAssassin on all the servers that I protect with the Barracuda. I also operate some mailservers with just MailScanner and SpamAssassin for comparance. As for figures: Of the last 10 million emails that my Barracuda processed it rejected 8.8 millions at the MTA level, taking quite some load off the individual mailservers behind it. That's my main reason to use the Barracuda, as I can't reject on the MTA level on the individual mailservers due to architectural limitations (Sendmail w/o Milter support, which can't be upgraded as that would break third party stuff). In the time that I used the unit so far there have been numerous updates for it, which all could be installed through the GUI interface. Some contained feature updates, some may have contained security updates, some apparently modernized the underlying SpamAssassin and virus scanner engine. Virus definitions and SA-rules are updated automatically, while feature and security updates require user interaction and often a reboot. AFAIK the larger Barracuda's also come with a client program (for Windows only?) which allow the users (and not only the administrator of the Firewall) to configure some of that stuff. Not entirely sure on that, so I won't comment. My experience with it so far in terms of relieability: On the average day I still get about 30-40 SPAM emails (0.9% of my regular mailtraffic) to my personal inbox which the Barracuda didn't flag or reject, but which my SpamAssassin-3.0.2 on the actual mailserver detected successfully. Most of these are pretty high scoring SPAM's with scores between 7.7 and 35.0 (my threshold is 4.5). So I'd say an up to date and manually installed SpamAssassin might still get you a better all around protection. As for virii: There have been ocassions where my manually updated Clam AV caught virii which passed through the Barracuda for a couple of hours, until they updated their definitions as well (WTG, Clam AV!). So far the box never crashed or threw another technical fit that impaired email delivery, which I can't entirely say for my manually maintained MailScanner and SpamAssassin installs. ;o) For the less technically inclined the Barracuda might be a nearly perfect choice, because it requires little to no technical skill to set it up and to operate it. Where it really shines is the GUI interface which leaves little to be desired. The ability to teach Bayes through the GUI and a load of options which allow you to tweak SpamAssasin, the ability to hack in custom rules through the GUI, MTA related stuff like like enforcing RFC 821 compliance for inbound emails, SPF support, sender spoof protection, rate controls and therelike. All in all it's not a bad product and the price appears to be right for what it offers, provided you buy in the US. The local reseller in my country charges an arm and a leg for one (recommended US sales price times two plus VAT - or around that figure). But personally I wouldn't do away with my manually installed SpamAssasin, though as that still catches more SPAM. ;o) -- With best regards, Michael Stauber
