my other FREQ of the day
mailscanner at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Sun Feb 16 09:58:09 GMT 2003
At 23:38 15/02/2003, you wrote:
>The three main weaknesses I see in mailscanner at the moment are:
>1) the dual queue approach combined with the "wait and see if anything
>arrived while we were asleep" approach to scanning messages
MailScanner 4 has multiple child processes all watching the queue, so the
response is very fast.
>2) its difficulty in working with certain mta's (it's not immediately
>obvious to me how I'd use it with courier, qmail, or communigate pro,
>and we're evaluating switching to courier or communigate pro ... but
>I'd like to stick with mailscanner)
It currently works with sendmail and Exim. Postfix is next on the list, but
that is going to take quite a while to write.
>3) somewhat related to #1 is that you cannot reject messages based upon
>results. You can try to bounce them, after the fact, but that isn't
>reliable (because you cannot trust the return addresses). I'd rather
>reject them outright.
That's your MTA's job.
>I have an idea that would solve all 3 problems, I think.
>Have an option for MailScanner to run as an SMTP daemon.
I don't mean to be rude, but sorry, there is no way that is going to
happen. I wouldn't trust it. Being an SMTP daemon is very hard, and the
MTA's are already very good at it. I don't re-invent the wheel.
>Am I the only person who would find that to be a useful direction for
>Mailscanner? I could probably help some with implementation (in fact,
>I might even be able to convince my boss that it's important enough to
>our services that I could make it one of my front-burner projects), and
>I would definitely be able to provide a machine or two for testing.
Feel free to write your own email virus scanner :-)
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support
More information about the MailScanner