> Brent Kennedy wrote: > > I use ClamAV and SA too. My understanding is that you do not want to > > continue processing an email if it is already seen as a virus(saves > > processing time by the spam server). Keep in mind that some users > > also have their AV on another box. I also use the short circuit > > plugin and a script to bump viruses to a central quarantine. > > > > I don't want the virus, even its noted as spam, sent on to the end > > user. We actually send the spam to our users junk email folder after > > its tagged. The exchange server reads the tag and redirects it. > > BTW, clamAV also checks for phishing messages(did you know that?).
On 03.05.09 21:50, Adam Katz wrote: > You mis-read my first section. By scanning for spam first (the more > probable of the two), then REJECTING the message, the virus scan is not > needed. An email is more likely to pass the virus filter than to pass > the spam filter, which means the very processing time you're talking > about saving is better saved with the other order. I think that scanning for viruses is much faster and should be done first, preferrably oustide of SA. You don't have to search for clamav plugin and shortcircuiting it, when you can use e.g. clamav-milter. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. 2B|!2B, that's a question!
