Sophos & ClamAV + Sanesecurity
MailScanner at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Mon Jan 11 13:37:05 GMT 2010
Which of your two options would you prefer?
I suspect the "correct spam processing" is what you actually want.
On 23/12/2009 08:48, ThB wrote:
> I'm running MailScanner and SA, ClamAV + sanesecurity signatures but also Sophos SAVI as a comercial virus scanner. Lately I reconfigured MS to recognize sanesecurity hits as spam. In my configuration viruses should be replaced by a warning message but still be delivered, so the users know they got a message.
> > From time to time there are messages which seem to be detected by Sophos as virus and by ClamAV as spam because of sanesecurity signatures. Such messages have the SpamVirus header but an empty SpamCheck header and no SpamScore. Such messages also are tagged as "Found to be infected" but the body part is not replaced.
> X-MailScanner: Found to be infected
> X-MailScanner-SpamVirus-Report: Sanesecurity.Junk.19516.UNOFFICIAL
> This now is neither the correct "virus" nor "spam" behaviour as configured.
> My request: do either the correct virus processing or the correct spam processing.
> MailScanner 4.79.4
> SpamAssassin 3.2.5
> ClamAV 0.95.3
> Sophos 4.48.0
> thanks and merry xmas
Julian Field MEng CITP CEng
Buy the MailScanner book at www.MailScanner.info/store
Need help customising MailScanner?
Need help fixing or optimising your systems?
Need help getting you started solving new requirements from your boss?
PGP footprint: EE81 D763 3DB0 0BFD E1DC 7222 11F6 5947 1415 B654
Follow me at twitter.com/JulesFM and twitter.com/MailScanner
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
More information about the MailScanner