On Tue, 29 Jan 2002, dman wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 02:58:56PM -0500, Mike Coughlan wrote:
>
>| > Has anybody created a rule for the MyParty virus? It is trapped by
>| > our virus scanner, but it would be nice to have a rule in SA to
>| > catch it.
>
>| Maybe this is an old philpsophical debate, but I'd be afraid of code
>| bloat in catching all mail viruses on top of spam.
>
> True, but I suppose this time you can add the definition of 'spam' to
> the argument list. On the one had, virii are "unsolicited junk mail".
>
> My view on this (here, now) is :
> If it is trivially easy to flag the virus within the existing SA
> framework, why not?
When did you last look at the size of the published virus database from
one of the big vendors?
Now, if you catch one virus, you can catch two. Once two, why not three?
Where do you stop? When? It's hard enough to find spam. Adding a second
target to the mix makes it slower, harder to manage and less useful to
people.
> Just three more lines in the config file, and easy enough for users to
> turn on/off. (you can also argue - then add it to my own configuration
> - and that is valid too)
...or you can distribute a ruleset that does match whatever subset of
possible Windows virus distributions you wish. See how many people use
it.
Then come back and tell us that ten thousand people depend on it and I
will happily admit to being wrong about it. ;)
Besides, why not block it with the content filtering rules of your MTA?
Daniel
--
Where love rules, there is no will to power, and where power
predominates,love is lacking. The one is the shadow of the other.
-- Carl Jung
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
