[unisog] Phishing targeting University Admissions

Joseph Brennan brennan at columbia.edu
Wed Jun 16 15:26:26 GMT 2004



--On Wednesday, June 16, 2004 9:44 AM -0500 Keith Schoenefeld 
<schoenk at utulsa.edu> wrote:

>> Blocking attachments by extension saves us about $30,000 worth of
>> anti-virus software licensing and additional hardware to process
>> scanning.  That sounds good to me.
>
> How exactly did you come up with those numbers?  Are you saying that you
> don't license antivirus software at all, or just don't do it on the mail
> server?


That's a vendor quote a few weeks ago for mail server anti-virus
software, plus a guess at the cost of additional hardware to do
the additional cpu chomping on all those attachments.  This is
for a 60,000 user system with 1,000,000 messages submitted a day,
of which 45% or more is spam or virus nowadays.

ClamAV is of course an alternative to that software fee.  Maybe
I am still reeling from that price quote.  The thing is, it won't
stop the brand-new rapidly spreading virus.  To me what it is
good for is preventing us delivering a lot of useless mail with
the message about an attachment having been removed.  That does
have value.  The problem is AV is not generalized.  Updates are
a nice revenue stream but not really the answer to the general
problem.

Joseph Brennan
Academic Technologies Group, Academic Information Systems (AcIS)
Columbia University in the City of New York





More information about the unisog mailing list