Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Recommendations for antivirus

Expand Messages
  • TFML
    Thanks, I m in the process of testing those suggested applications!
    Message 1 of 10 , Jan 18, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Thanks, I'm in the process of testing those suggested applications!

      On Jan 17, 2013, at 7:07 AM, DTNX Postmaster <postmaster@...> wrote:

      > On Jan 17, 2013, at 09:25, Jamie Griffin wrote:
      >
      >> * Ned Slider <ned@...> [2013-01-17 04:25:04 +0000]:
      >>
      >>> On 16/01/13 22:20, Erwan David wrote:
      >>>> Le 16/01/2013 23:17, Terry Gilsenan a écrit :
      >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
      >>>>>> From: owner-postfix-users@... [mailto:owner-postfix-
      >>>>>> users@...] On Behalf Of TFML
      >>>>>> Sent: Thursday, 17 January 2013 7:55 AM
      >>>>>> To: Postfix users
      >>>>>> Subject: Recommendations for antivirus
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>> I'm running a server on average week we receive 14,000, send 19,000,
      >>>>>> and in total deferred/bounced/rejected 5,000 -- Can you guys recommend
      >>>>>> a good antivirus that will work well with postfix. Meaning efficient in
      >>>>>> processing emails without dropping them into oblivion or kill the
      >>>>>> server CPU and/or Memory? Any suggestions will be fantastic!
      >>>>>>
      >>>>> I recommend Amavisd-new and clam.
      >>>>>
      >>>>>
      >>>> You may also use clamav as a milter.
      >>>>
      >>>
      >>> Another recommendation for ClamAV.
      >>>
      >>> As ClamAV is used predominantly in mail setups, their signature
      >>> database seems to do fairly well against email-borne threats.
      >>> Further, it's easy to create and add your own signatures allowing
      >>> you to respond immediately to an outbreak rather than waiting for
      >>> signatures to get added to official updates.
      >>
      >> clamav with Sanesecurity signatures - search google for them. easy to install.
      >
      > We use ClamAV here as well with clamav-milter, although we found the
      > Sanesecurity signatures to be too strict to use for straight rejection.
      > YMMV, of course, be sure to at least test :-)
      >
      > Cya,
      > Jona
      >
    • Jeroen Geilman
      ... Are you certain of those numbers ? For any publically-reachable MX host, the amount of spam rejected is AT LEAST 10 times the amount of desirable mail
      Message 2 of 10 , Jan 25, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        On 01/16/2013 10:55 PM, TFML wrote:
        > I'm running a server on average week we receive 14,000, send 19,000, and in total deferred/bounced/rejected 5,000

        Are you certain of those numbers ?

        For any publically-reachable MX host, the amount of spam rejected is AT
        LEAST 10 times the amount of desirable mail accepted.

        Over 90% of all mail is spam, sadly; this is near-universal.

        Of course, you might be deploying a non-postfix solution as MX frontend,
        like Barracuda, but for an exposed MX host, 14:5 Ham/Spam is an entirely
        unbelievable ratio.


        --
        J.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.