nod32 experience

[Julian Field]

At 07:45 30/05/2003, you wrote:
>On Wed, 28 May 2003 21:29:28 +0100, Julian Field
><mailscanner at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK> wrote:
>
> >At 20:39 28/05/2003, you wrote:
> >>Could anyone share their experience using the nod32 scanner with
> >>MailScanner?
> >>I just got word from their sales department that we could license it for
> >>$200 per server, unlimited number of users.
> >
> >You need to get version 1.99 from them.
> >If you manage to get a copy of it out of them that actually works (it has
> >totally different command-line options from previous versions) then please
> >let me know. I have given up on them, they are very friendly but can't send
> >me a proper installation of 1.99 that works.
> >--
> >Julian Field
> >www.MailScanner.info
> >Professional Support Services at www.MailScanner.biz
> >MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support
>
>I contacted their sales department for a trial version. They couldnt
>provide that, I did however get a time-limited account for the "real"
>version. After installing and updating I notice its "NOD32 Version 1.420
>(20030529)"
>
>Is this no good with MailScanner? Why do we need 1.99?

They have more than 1 version number. It is always possible that 1.420 is
1.99, I really can't remember any more. The 1.99 version has a double-dash
at the beginning of all the command-line arguments (e.g. "--log") whereas
earlier ones have only a single dash. That was the only reliable way I
found of working out which version I had.

If you run "nod32 --help" or "nod32 -h" or something like that, it should
print the usage for you.

1.99 has some serious scanning problems fixed, I would have to do a serious
mail archive search to find more details though.
--
Julian Field
www.MailScanner.info
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support