Re: Corporate spam filter

On 4/19/06, QSCANFSCTL <QSCANFSCTL@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >From what I've seen on the net Mailwatch prices range from $5 to $2 per
> user
> per month. If that's still the case then Mailwatch would be 3 to 6 times
> more expensive than a StandGuard Anti-Virus subscription. Also, SGAV
> provides many additional features like on-access scanning, on-demand
> scanning, object integrity scanning, partition scanning, ..., that would
> not
> be included in a service like Mailwatch. Likewise Mailwatch provides
> valuable features like spam and content filtering. I'm not saying
> Mailwatch
> is not worth looking into by any means, just trying to clarify a point
> that
> could be taken the wrong way.
>
> On the plus side they are using the McAfee scanning engine which is
> excellent.


I mean no disparagement to SGAV and was not clear on my point.  Obviously,
SGAV offers substantially more functionality.  But if the primary driver for
running SGAV is to protect the email, and they are going with an anti-spam
service anyway, then MailWatch might effectively cost less because of
reduced A/V costs.  If SGAV is doing more than mail, then it's cost is
irrelevant to the discussion.

In the interest of clarity ...
-- based on my experience you overstate the MailWatch charges substantially.
-- MailWatch uses the McAfee engine and also scans with the Clam (
http://www.clamav.net/) engine.
-- I find that having the spam and virus kept outside of my network to be a
huge plus for the hosted services like MailWatch.  My mail server never sees
the spam, and the viruses don't get near to my network.

If I were starting from scratch, I would probably have email hosted by a
third party (perhaps http://www.centerbeam.com/) and side-step this issue
entirely.

Take care

--
Tom Jedrzejewicz
tomjedrz@xxxxxxxxx