:: On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 13:01:06 +0100 :: <[email protected]> :: Grayhat <[email protected]> wrote:
> :: On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 12:55:08 +0100 > > No, and it doesn't really make sense; the issue is due to the way > > ClamAV reloads signatures and not to the way ASSP checks for its > > availability; making ASSP dependent on clamd to work is a nonsense, > > clamav is just ONE of the filters used. and since we're at it; ASSP uses a whole arsenal of methods to detect spam/notspam messages, and being a "frontline" filter MUST be as fast as possible, this excludes the use of "longer than usual" checks; then, if you need to perform some more costly (in terms of time/CPU/other...) kind of filtering, you'd better consider a "second stage" filter, that is a filter applied on the pipeline which, at end, brings to the end user mailbox; in your case, you may consider using an instance of an SMTP "router" (be it postfix, sendmail or whatever) which may perform further checking on the incoming messages (already accepted by ASSP) and "tag" them so that they'll be moved to the user's "spam" (or, in case it exists, "virus") folder; but "forcing ASSP to wait for clamd" is a very BAD idea, the next one would be forcing ASSP to wait a lot of time for DNSBL/URIBL answers or pretending to have it run some deep and time consuming checks on each and every incoming email and, at the very same time, complaining for timeout, slowdowns and so on :P ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151&iu=/4140 _______________________________________________ Assp-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
