On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 at 10:55:41 -0800, Robin Lynn Frank wrote: > On Thursday 15 January 2004 09:33, Tomasz Papszun wrote: > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 at 9:08:11 -0800, Robin Lynn Frank wrote: > > > No this is not spam. My question is does anyone know the smallest size > > > for virus/trojan/worm payload around? We scan incoming mail and I am > > > looking for a way to reduce resource useage by setting a lower limit on > > > what is scanned.. > > > > Do you mean the smallest size that a virus can be? > > There are viruses which are only 25 B (yes: twenty five bytes!). > > Well, there goes that idea. The reason I asked is that if we have to take the > server down for any reason, there can be a lot of mail from our backup that > has to be processed when we are back up. We have a script that invokes > clamscan to scan mail as it arrives and that can slow things down a bit.
That's why using clamd (or clamdscan) is recommended. See the thread "pretty basic question - clamscan vs clamdscan". -- Tomasz Papszun SysAdm @ TP S.A. Lodz, Poland | And it's only [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lodz.tpsa.pl/ | ones and zeros. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ClamAV.net/ A GPL virus scanner ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ Clamav-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clamav-users
