tim,
all clear. thx.
sounds, the, like a pretty simple decision *4 me* ... that is, to use the same
approach as you.
cheers,
richard
-- On August 1, 2005 8:04:29 PM -0400 Timothy Spear
<tspear@???> wrote:
> Because you already have the SpamAssassin connection completed and/or you
> are performing the scanning at delivery time when performance is less an
> issue.
>
> Tim
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: OpenMacNews [mailto:OpenMacNews@speakeasy.net]
> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 8:02 PM
> To: Timothy Spear
> Cc: exim-users@???
> Subject: RE: [exim] which approach for: exiscan, clamav & spamassassin ?
>
> hi tim,
>
> thx 4 the reply =)
>
>> I did the exiscan direct to ClamAV and then SpamAssassin. This is to
> reduce
>> load on the server, since I perform it is part of the SMTP Data ACL. Virus
>> email is rejected before the call to SpamAssassin. Since SpamAssassin will
>> run all rules which apply, even if the spam score has been passed, I would
>> end up running spam filtering rules against viral email.
>
> that seems clear enuf.
>
> as i think abt the relative performance issues -- no, i haven't (yet) done
> any
> tests -- tho, your common-sense approach makes me wonder why one WOULD use
> the
> SpamAssassin-using-ClamAV-plugin approach ...
>
>
> hmmm .....
>
>
> richard
