anomy-list

Re: Re: swen virus

From: Brent Kennedy (95567@xyz.molar.is)
Date: Mon 06 Oct 2003 - 01:02:02 GMT

  • Next message: Systems Administrator: "Re: Re: Re: swen virus"

    [ Eftirfarandi var sent af vef molar.is í frh. af bréfi
      http://www.molar.is/listar/anomy-list/2003-10/0006.shtml ]

    QUOTED_MESSAGE:
    > On Mon, 6 Oct 2003, Brent Kennedy wrote:
    >
    [SNIP]
    >
    >         Here's
    > a few good reasons why an ISP might have server filtering
    > of some kind:
    > 1. Viruses cost us money in terms of support calls
    >
    >         ("Hi,
    > my Internet doesn't work").
    > 2. Spam filtering keeps
    > customers, and doesn't have the
    >         administrative
    > costs of them changing their e-mail address every
    >
    >         once in
    > a while 3. All of us ISP employees are sick of receiving
    > viruses from
    >         customers
    > (happens to me on a daily basis -- haven't gotten all
    >
    >         the
    > filtering 100% implemented yet), and if we're doing it for
    >
    >         ourselves,
    > we might as well do it for the customers. 4. For outgoing
    > mail, to save on bandwidth costs

    Well, what about the quarantine option, force filtering for every users(spam and attachment), but have a quarantine setup for each individual user that deletes at every so often (either set by user or global). That way, they get what they want, but are not exposed, unless they choose to be, to the quarantine. You could set that up thru webmail only. That way you can avoid all the bad attachments and worries about clients accidentally setting stuff off. But they will still be able to get the email they are missing.

    I assume you would like to have calls about missing emails than the internet connection loss ones. Course the internet connection loss ones, from my experience, seem to ALWAYS come from network aware worms that work outside of the email infrastructure.



    hosted by molar.is