 |
 |
Thanks for the suggested solution ... I'll pass it along. The mail team is exploring a range of solutions, from free to expensive, for both the anti-spam and anti-virus issues. In both cases, you want a very low false positive rate, while still being as close to 100% as possible in catching real spam or viruses. Anti-spam products in particular cost dramatically more as you get closer to 100% effectiveness. Getting the most bang for the buck is the issue. On another note, yes, we certainly do understand the costs of spam -- both the cost of lost productivity and the cost of user frustration. The request for funding for anti-virus competed with many other worthy technology funding requests. Finally, keep in mind that even a free central anti-spam and anti-virus solution is likely to require additional hardware to do all the processing -- another cost. Maybe this would be a good agenda item for the next face-to-face NAG meeting? /rich >Amavis with clam antivirus seems like a very good fit for >the existing Exim base for mail.msu.edu. > >On a second note, developing a web interface for end users >to select from public blacklists to use for filtering their >incoming mail would also be a nice feature, or at the very >least, implementing something like a SpamAssassin option >for the user to allow for tagging of emails before >downloading/reading if they choose. > >I've setup multiple servers with this type of configuration, >and end users haven't seen a single virus in their inbox for >a very long time, and spam loads are reduced by 95%+. >On average, 50-75% of incoming email has proven to be spam >for the systems that I admin. I expect MSU has similar >(if not higher) stats. > >While these solutions are not commercial products, neither >is Exim, or the OS running under it (generally). > >I know it's not as simple as saying "this works, lets plug it >in and use it", but there are some very effective solutions >out there that don't cost a too much. > >That's my $0.02 on the subject anyhow. :) > >-Russell > > >Rich Wiggins wrote: > >> E-mails laden with viruses, especially fraudulent software patches, >> are for sure very common these days. >> >> The Computer Laboratory mail team is exploring a range of anti-spam >> and anti-virus alternatives. Some money was provided for this >> in the most recent APP&R but the most effective commercial products >> are very expensive. >> >> Note that centralized anti-spam and centralized anti-virus tools are >> related issues but might or might not lead to a solution from a >> single vendor. >> >> We suggest that members of the MSU community use a desktop anti-virus >> tool, and we'll continue to suggest this even if we eventually offer >> a centralized mail filter for viruses. E-mail is only one vector >> for delivery of viruses. >> >> Anti-spam and anti-virus, along with other customer suggestions for >> improvements to mail.msu.edu, are on the "wish list". Go to the >> MSU home page and search for: >> >> mail wish list >> >> .. to see the entire list. >> >> /rich