From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 08:36:32 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF60D16A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 08:36:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from firecrest.mail.pas.earthlink.net (firecrest.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.121.247]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1EBF43D3F for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 08:36:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from algould@datawok.com) Received: from 20-74.lctv-b4.cablelynx.com ([24.204.20.74] helo=localhost.invalid) by firecrest.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1B1peC-00015r-00; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 08:36:32 -0800 From: "Andrew L. Gould" To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:36:45 -0600 User-Agent: KMail/1.6 References: <200403120926.04419.racerx@makeworld.com> <4051E360.9080109@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <4051E360.9080109@mac.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200403121036.45593.algould@datawok.com> X-ELNK-Trace: ee791d459e3d6817d780f4a490ca69564776905774d2ac4b1828405a838285d34c97b92bedd479ef350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c Subject: Re: F-Prot for BSD WorkStation X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:36:33 -0000 On Friday 12 March 2004 10:20 am, Chuck Swiger wrote: > Chris wrote: > > So far the nightly dat update works well - my real question is simply > > this - Has anyone used this port? Is it really something that needs to be > > added since the majority of virii are Windows based. > > I use ClamAV instead, but same difference. The overwhelming majority of > virus are Windows-based, agreed, which means that virus scanning is really > useful if you are using your machine as a mail server or as a fileserver to > Windows clients. > > You might find that doing the full system scan takes up a lot of resources > for some time (possibly hours), but that probably only matters if you > happen to want to use the machine for something else then. I also use ClamAV. If resource utilization is an issue, the scanning strategy could be changed to scan only email and /home areas frequently. Full system scans could be scheduled less frequently and during periods of low utilization. Best regards, Andrew Gould