On Wednesday 16 Feb 2005 15:15, Scott Ryan wrote: > On Wednesday 16 February 2005 16:26, Nigel Horne shaped the electrons to say: > > On Wednesday 16 Feb 2005 14:18, Ted Fines wrote: > > > FOUR MINUTES, 13 SECONDS for an 800k email. > > > > Look at the file again. It is NOT an 800k mail. It is over 200 emails > > embedded within each other. By definition the largest message is about 800K > > and the smallest is about 1K give or take, giving an average of 400K (don't > > worry if the maths isn't too accurate). So thats about 200x400K = c.80Mb. > > 0.80 didn't scan it properly and would have let a virus through, 0.83 fixes > > that bug. > > My dillema is now this, we cannot upgrade to any version above 0.80 due to > oversized mails potentially causing a DOS. What functionality am I missing > out on (in a nutshell) by running 0.80? > Are there many viruses that I will not be able to catch?
I have seen this in the field, indeed the scans were added as the result of a bug report. It's your decision on what to do. > Is there potentially a work around for these types of mails? > > regards -- Nigel Horne. Arranger, Composer, Typesetter. NJH Music, Barnsley, UK. ICQ#20252325 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.bandsman.co.uk _______________________________________________ http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users
