[SpamCop-List] Re: email@example.com
ric.gates at bigsleep.org
Sun Jul 25 11:20:34 EDT 2004
On 25 Jul 2004 Steven Maesslein entered spamcop and left
news:slrncg6sgq.uq.nobody at 127.0.0.1:
> Either you reduce the CPU load by no longer scanning for viruses, in
> which case you get a bigger mail spool, or you limit the spooled data by
> scanning for viruses, which uses CPU power.
Many just look for virus signatures, which I assume would take less CPU
since you don't need to scan the entire body. This is easy to do in
Postfix, and possible in Sendmail Milter (though I've never tried it). But
still you can only reject after DATA which is of little use, except maybe
for false positives. Also it doesn't help anyone unless you also scan your
logs for virus rejects so you can get the IPs to send reports to, some ISPs
dump viruses and send the user a notice "E-Mail from someone at someserver
contained a virus" which is absolutely no use to anyone.
But the best solution for a spam drop is a separate server, and the FTC
should have just done that in the first place.
Personally I would never scan for viruses unless I was paid a good amount
to do so. I have no problem with blocking infected systems.
More information about the SpamCop-List