RE: PTR Rules

[ha...@t-online.de]

>> We went from 2k emails a day (1900
>> spam) to 4K with the latest worm, and SA doesn't appear to be able to help
>> at all. Sigh.
>> 
>> Dan
>> 

Hi, get a few birds in the garden to take care of the rainworms :)

Probably my setup is unusual, but SA would not even see infected mail, because the
virus scanner sends it to quarantine at an earlier step in the queue

Wolfgang Hamann

Re: PTR Rules

[Matt Kettler <mk...@evi-inc.com>]

hamann.w@t-online.de wrote:

>>>We went from 2k emails a day (1900
>>>spam) to 4K with the latest worm, and SA doesn't appear to be able to help
>>>at all. Sigh.
>>>
>>>Dan
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>
>Hi, get a few birds in the garden to take care of the rainworms :)
>
>Probably my setup is unusual, but SA would not even see infected mail, because the
>virus scanner sends it to quarantine at an earlier step in the queue
>
>Wolfgang Hamann
>
>  
>
I agree 110%. If you're trying to deal with viruses by using
spamassassin, you've got the wrong tool for the job.

Clamav with any of dozens of MTA integration tools is infinitely
superior for this job, and free at that.

SA makes a great spam filter, but it's usefulness as a virus filter is
quite limited. SA might be able to help out, but it shouldn't be any
major part of your defense against viruses.

Admittedly the latest sober is also generating a lot of garbage bounces
from oddball mailservers, and SA can help with that, but I don't see how
lack of PTR records applies to bounces..