similar to: Spam vs. Viruses

For the last several years, I have been using Vexira MailArmor (http://www.centralcommand.com) for anti-virus protection on the mail server here at Shorewall.net. While Vexira is an excellent product and I have been very happy with it, it costs me $300US/year for a one-domain license. To avoid this expense, I have decided to try ClamAV (http://www.clamav.net). I have installed ClamAV and since my

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Vexira NOTICE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * This version of Vexira MailArmor is a DEMO version and not full featured. This banner message cannot be disabled until you purchase Vexira Antivirus. After you purchase and install a license for use of Vexira Antivirus for Mail servers this message will be deactivated. Certain features are disabled in this DEMO version of

Return-Path: <viuwier@wp.pl> X-Original-To: shorewall-announce@lists.shorewall.net Delivered-To: shorewall-announce@lists.shorewall.net Received: from smtp.wp.pl (smtp.wp.pl [212.77.101.160]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.shorewall.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3D8F33DB3 for

Hi, I am using Redhat 7.3 which comes with openssh 3.1p1. I am running an antivirus software called vexira on this server. It starts of 2 daemon processes in the background. Whenever I stop/start these daemons in an ssh session, it hangs. I added "shopt -s huponexit" (without the quotes) in /etc/bashrc, but the hangs still occur. Any advice on this would be appreciated Regards, Yusuf

Hi all I've found a few different packages (RAV, Kaspersky,Vexira, Clam ...) which offer Anti-Virus features for Linux servers. It looks like RAV specifically supports Samba servers. My question is: Can anyone relay their experiences / opinions / thoughts about which one would work best in a multiple-server environment (~100 Windows Clients)? Thanks in advance -- all comments are

> On 19 Jan, 2018, at 4:39, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: > > > > On 19.01.2018 04:35, Adam Weinberger wrote: >> Since upgrading to 2.3.0 / 0.5.0.1, incoming PDFs are getting mangled. >> It seems to be happening when I use vnd.dovecot.filter. When I comment >> out the block, things come through fine. >> >> My filter block looks like

Op 1/20/2018 om 11:01 PM schreef Adam Weinberger: >> On 20 Jan, 2018, at 10:05, Adam Weinberger <adamw at adamw.org> wrote: >> >> >>> On 19 Jan, 2018, at 4:39, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 19.01.2018 04:35, Adam Weinberger wrote: >>>> Since upgrading to 2.3.0 / 0.5.0.1, incoming

Since upgrading to 2.3.0 / 0.5.0.1, incoming PDFs are getting mangled. It seems to be happening when I use vnd.dovecot.filter. When I comment out the block, things come through fine. My filter block looks like this: require "vnd.dovecot.filter"; filter "bogofilter_filter"; if header :contains "X-Bogosity" [ "Spam,

Hi, on my small Xen-virtualised server with 48 MiB RAM I use Postfix and Dovecot, because the Debian administrators dislike qmail [1], which is in my opinion despite some maintainability and code quality issues a quite well designed software, because it mostly follows the UNIX principles. Postfix is not able to sort my E-Mail into different Maildir folders and after I looked at procmail's

Hi! I have a Linux shorewall firewall that is the default gw of the network. I want to redirect all localy originating traffic to port 80 into another machine on port 8002 into the local network. This machine is a WIN2000 machine running a commercial software (proxy, content filtering) that only runs into Windows... :-( I tried something like this but this doesn''t seem to work: local

Hi, I installed the shorewall 1.3.8-2 debian package to my debian testing machine which serves as the gateway to the internet. Since I have two other machine connect to internet thru this gateway machine, I also downloaded the configuration guide for "basic two-interface firewall" and followed the instructions. When I try to start the shorewall I get the following message and can not

I'm using maildrop to filter mail like: xfilter "/usr/bin/spamc" xfilter "/usr/bin/bogofilter -ep" I want to change to deliver (so I can use sieve) but can deliver do this?

> On 21 Dec, 2017, at 14:37, Stephan Bosch <stephan at rename-it.nl> wrote: > > Op 12/19/2017 om 8:41 AM schreef Adam Weinberger: >> I'm getting a behaviour with pigeonhole that I wasn't expecting. Am I >> misunderstanding the design? >> >> I run my messages through a vnd.dovecot.filter. It's essentially this: >> >> filter

The ''firewall'' and ''functions'' file in CVS together produce a 30%+ speedup of ''shorewall restart'' on my firewall when compared to 1.3.11a. Please test with these files -- I don''t anticipate making any more performance changes for 1.3.12 and I want to be sure that I didn''t break anything. -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Shorewall

DEBIAN package information: ii dovecot-common 0.99.11-3 ii dovecot-imapd 0.99.11-3 ii bogofilter 0.93.1-1 Apologies for cross-posting, but I think the problem lies somewhere in here. Maybe someone can tell me something useful. Now, I've confirmed the following: I received a mail message that was not spam, of size 2132 originally. clamav scanned it and bumped the size up to 2356

Rafa³ Dutko has just discovered a potentially serious bug in version 1.3.0 and 1.3.1. In both versions, where an interface option appears on multiple interfaces, the option may only be applied to the first interface on which it appears. A corrected firewall script for 1.3.1 is available at: http://www.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/errata/1.3.1/firewall and

Shorewall 1.3.9 is available. In this release: 1. DNS Names are now allowed in Shorewall config files (I still recommend against using them however). 2. The connection SOURCE may now be qualified by both interface and IP address in a Shorewall rule. 3. Shorewall startup is now disabled after initial installation until the file /etc/shorewall/startup_disabled is removed. 4. The

does anyone know how to enable the "udp loose" function in kernel 2.4.x? one of my fave games requires this to work on the net and i''d really like to move away from the 2.2 series kernels. tia

Hello all, I don''t want this to be a tome'' but felt a comment was in order. Many new users (Linux and Shorewall are no different) are more apt to not read the manual(RTFM) as they view it as "Taking to long" and don''t understand it''s relevance in their particular scenario. This is unfortunate in the case of Shorewall. As the documents are not only

Hello all, i am new to shorewall and i already have a question ;) i am running a mailserver in my dmz (or actually this will be when = evertything will be working fine with shorewall) with public ip = addresses.. i have a subnet of 8 ip addresses (255.255.255.248 mask) and = i was planning of the classic 3 nic (eth0-2) setup... the dmz should = work with proxy-arping...=20 now my quesion is