On 4/11/07, Brian Morrison <
bdm@fenrir.org.uk> wrote:
> I'd say that it is more dangerous to stop mail delivery due to failed
> virus scanning than it is not to scan mail while clamd is unresponsive.
But then the potential for virus infected email to get through is
raised. While I realize that end-users *should* have virus scanners
on their machines, the "comfort" factor knowing that the email server
is scanning for virii makes them a tad complacent. Thus it's more
likely that a user can be infected if they believe that no virus laden
mail can reach them.
So, instead, blocking mail until the virus scanner is back online is,
imho, a better option. Of course, at that point you're relying on the
SMTP capabilities of the senders... But on the upside, it stops spam
from coming in for a while! :)
> Brian Morrison
> bdm@fenrir.org.uk
--
Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold
XenoPhage0@gmail.com
http://blog.godshell.com
_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
(text/plain)