|
-
September 26th, 2004, 06:57 PM
#1
AV Strategy
Lets get a discussion going on general Antivirus practice.
It seems many people have different perspectives on AV, heres a few:
-No AV is necessary
Some would say that no AV is necessary if you are configured and updated like you should be. I personally think this is valid in a sense but after the MS04-028 GDI+ vulnerability, it makes me wonder. What would happen if the vulnerabiltiy went unreported? There is no way to secure Internet Explorer from it, unless you don't load images. (btw would MS04-028 effect FireFox?)
-Multiple AV's
One might think that running multiple AV's would check the results of the other, but that can lead to errors while checking files and severe performance issues.
-Single AV
One strong AV solution to protect your box.
My opinion is that a single AV is necessary on mail and file servers. On a workstation, could a multiple AV solution work out? Clamwin doesn't have realtime protection AFAIK, and would not interfere with software like Norton that uses realtime protection. Would there be any benefit to running a realtime AV like Norton, with a sidekick AV like Clamwin? I understand and believe running two realtime AV's like McAffee and Norton isn't smart for reasons stated, but I don't think Clamwin would interfere with performance of another AV?
Anyhow, what are your Antivirus setups, or do you think they aren't necessary?
//me goes to chipotle
edit:
My setup is one AV, Clamwin. It is lightweight and the defs are updated well. If you want, you can make your own defs, which rocks. I like Clamwin a lot, I might write a tut to support it.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|