clamav-users February 2010 archive
Main Archive Page > Month Archives  > clamav-users archives
clamav-users: Re: [Clamav-users] Getting "***UNCHECKED***&q

Re: [Clamav-users] Getting "***UNCHECKED***" on some emails I send out.

From: Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uhlar_at_nospam>
Date: Fri Feb 26 2010 - 12:40:53 GMT

> > Steven Stern wrote:
> > > Checking outgoing mail is pointless. Why bother?

> On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 10:33:09 -0500
> Kris Deugau <> articulated:
> > So you can reduce malware propagation? (And as a result, maybe not
> > end up on everyone's local blacklist for spewing garbage...)

On 24.02.10 11:38, Jerry wrote:
> It is still pointless and a waste of processing power.

you like being on blacklist after your users start spewing spam and viruses, don't you?

> > > If I were mailing malware, I'd be sure to mark that it had been
> > > scanned, approved, and was safe to open.
> >
> > *nod* I won't trust third-party headers claiming mail is safe or
> > non-spam... I *will* happily trust third-party headers that say it's
> > malicious or spam.
> Again, pointless. I do not believe that there is any industrial
> standard or RFC that specifically states how to insert a header that
> that marks an e-mail as infected.

doesn't that "*nod*" mean anything?

> Simply employing your own AV software is a lot simpler, and probably more
> reliable.

of course we do. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, ; Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. The only substitute for good manners is fast reflexes. _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit