If virus, don't scan with SA

[Chris Barber]

There is another very good reason for not bothering to micro-optimi[sz]e
this.

If you're scanning your viruses with spamassassin there's a good chance
they'll be auto-learned as spam.  So when the phishing attack is mutated
to avoid existing signatures Bayes can still get them.

Cheers,

Phil

--
Phil Randal
Networks Engineer
Herefordshire Council
Hereford, UK

-----Original Message-----
From: mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info
[mailto:mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info] On Behalf Of Julian
Field
Sent: 24 July 2008 09:30
To: MailScanner discussion
Subject: Re: If virus, don't scan with SA

The reason I haven't tried to implement it is that viruses (incl what
sanesecurity finds) are a very small percentage of your total mail
volume. Probably 2 or 3% at a guess. So it wouldn't actually make any
noticeable difference to your MailScanner server load.

Jules
--
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner

Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!



Thanks for all the responses guys. I see about 25-30% viruses now that I
use sane security. I guess it is different for everyone. But the added
bayes entries are prob worth leaving it alone.

Thanks again,
Chris