I use both. Exiscan is the first line for blocking files that should never
be accepted like .bat, .pif, .com, .vbs, .scr and it's also the first line
for ant-virus.
However Mailscanner is much better at handling file attachments overall,
example:
One vendor sends a certain update in the form of an executable (Ford Motor)
and they will not archive it. The name is always the same so I have "allow
thisfile.exe$" close to the top of the rules and "deny \.exe$" further down.
Passes the one we need and stops all the others. Also will catch executables
even if they have an extension like .txt .
You can also add a reason to each reject line that the user and (optionally)
the sender will see when a file has been stripped so you can explain why
right there in the message rather than having to deal with the question
every time.
Handles TNEF expansion (not sure about Exiscan). Can configure to remove all
HTML tags, dangerous HTML tags (IFRAME, CodeBase, etc), script sections,
external message bodies, more.
So I think Exiscan is good for front line, but I like having Mailscanner on
the back end to do the thorough work.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: exim-users-admin@??? [mailto:exim-users-admin@exim.org]On
> Behalf Of Mike Oliveri
> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 9:33 PM
> To: exim-users@???
> Subject: [Exim] Exiscan vs. MailScanner
>
>
> (Please excuse me if this shows up twice -- I previously sent it from
> the wrong email address.)
>
> Has anybody had any direct experience comparing MailScanner with
> Exiscan? I only just heard of Exiscan and it looks like it will do
> everything I need. Any pros or cons? Any benefits either way
> performance-wise?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Take care,
> Mike Oliveri
>
>
> --
>
> ## List details at
> http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users Exim details at
http://www.exim.org/ ##
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
