spamass-milt-list
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: I want to use spamass-milter + clamav-milter


From: Adam Katz
Subject: Re: I want to use spamass-milter + clamav-milter
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 00:25:41 -0400 (EDT)

> Someone must have done this. Is there a particular order that's better?

I run spamass-milter before clamav-milter to minimize frivolous scanning.

With either order, incoming mail has to pass the spam check AND the virus
check before delivery, but failing just one will result in rejection (and
thus the second check is skipped).  By shear numbers, spam overshadows
viruses by a very significant margin.  Therefore, checking all spam for
viruses will create far more load than checking all viruses for spam.  On
top of this, Spamassassin can detect many viruses on its own.

The only case in which it is advisable to scan for viruses first is when
there is an onslaught of virus-laden email, and I don't think those are
common enough to justify scanning for viruses first.  Let's hope Wednesday
(Conficker) doesn't change this!


I also use milter-greylist before both spamass-milter and clamav-milter as
it is by far the least resource-intensive check (only a db lookup!) and
greylisting kills over 80% of my incoming mail.  You can take this idea or
leave it.  Note: greylisting requires custom tweaking and user training
and should not be taken lightly.  A conservative example case is to delay
only traffic from Windows servers (most bots run Windows, few relays do).

-Adam




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]