[Mimedefang] Which AV package are most people using with MimeDefang?

[Stefano McGhee]

Hello,
	I use a mildly modified MD filter plus File::Scan.  I have found
that most every virus-ridden message gets blocked by MD.  The only
difference that File::Scan makes is that is gives it a name i.e. BugBear or
Klez.  Even before I updated File::Scan to detect BugBear, MD was stopping
it.  The only thing I am curious about is whether File:Scan/MD will work
against MIME exploits and the like.  I'm guessing they do as I have seen
nary an exploit detected by my inside server running McAffee GroupShield
for Exchange.  MD/File::Scan closes the door on these evils. :)

IMHO,

Stefano

-----Original Message-----
From: David F. Skoll [mailto:dfs at roaringpenguin.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 11:11 AM
To: mimedefang at lists.roaringpenguin.com
Subject: Re: [Mimedefang] Which AV package are most people using with
MimeDefang?


On Wed, 23 Oct 2002, Nels Lindquist wrote:

> You might want to look at H+BEDV Antivir (http://www.hbedv.com).

Has anyone tried this experiment?

- Install ClamAV with the clamd daemon and freshclam.
- Block all the dangerous extensions with MD.
- Wait a month or two and see if *anything* gets past that would have
  been trapped by a commercial virus scanner.

I have my doubts.  I think the (commercial) virus-scanning industry is
a big ripoff, and MD's default filter in combination with clamd is
probably every bit as good as a commercial package.

If I'm wrong, however, I'd be interested to hear about it.

--
David.

_______________________________________________
MIMEDefang mailing list
MIMEDefang at lists.roaringpenguin.com
http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang