[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: qmail anti-virus

David Fokkema wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 11:27:19AM +0200, Haim Ashkenazi wrote:
>> Paul Johnson wrote:
>> > Hash: SHA1
>> > 
>> > On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 02:38:02AM +0200, Haim Ashkenazi wrote:
>> >> The clamav is not a bad solution (although I wouldn't recommend it to
>> >> a company).
>> > 
>> > This intrigues me.  Why wouldn't you recommend it to a company?
>> Because I have one company that uses it (it also has a commercial one on
>> all the desktops) and it happens (although rarely) that a new virus gets
>> passed through clamav, at least that's what I hear from their sysadmin.
>> since a virus inside a company network can potentially cause much more
>> damage then at home I would be afraid to reccomend that to a company.
> And it is caught by the commercial one?
yes, that's how they found that a virus has passed. 

it could be just a timing issue (e.g. what time the update was scheduled),
or even that the virus was in a password protected zipfile (like the one
I've got 10 minutes ago), but since I wasn't there when it happened I can't
tell why, and I don't have other client that uses it, so I can't really
recommend it as a secure solution to my clients. I do give them this
option, but I also recommend that they'll have a commercial anti virus on
the desktops. 


> David

Reply to: