Educause Security Discussion mailing list archives

Re: Barracuda Spam Filter


From: Tony Harris <harrist () CCV VSC EDU>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 13:17:47 -0400

Can you point me at any info that documents the Barracuda as being a Linux
and SpamAssassin box?  There's nothing on their website that indicates that,
unfortunately, and I'd like to see what they have to say about doing so.

(Also, if that's the case, given that both are OpenSource, don't they have
to acknowledge their use of them somewhere public?  At least out of
fairness?  I know, silly me for expecting fairness to win in cases of
corporate interest...)

Tony Harris
Assistant CTO
Community College of Vermont
harrist () ccv edu
(802) 241-3535

Zhë dishthe shthál ñe lhôñ svóná záxá - The direct path is not always
straight.
-------------------------------------------
PRIVACY & CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is for the designated
recipient only and may contain privileged, confidential, or otherwise
private information. If you have received it in error, please notify the
sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of an email
received in error is prohibited.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Keller [mailto:kellermg () POTSDAM EDU] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 8:55 AM
To: SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU
Subject: Re: [SECURITY] Barracuda Spam Filter

On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 19:42 -0400, Dave Koontz wrote:
Watching this thread, I have a couple questions about the 
'cuda' product.
What exactly does this product do that the free Spam 
Assassin code doesn't?
In other words, why should I pay someone $1000+ dollars 
annually for what
appears to basically be free software bundled on a scaled 
down server.

I've been waiting for this question to be asked. Thank you.

The answer is a resounding "Nothing". The 'cuda is SpamAssassin in a
shiny frame, with a pretty sandbox web-interface so it's not so scary.
The only question to ask is how much "not so scary" is worth to you.

We built, in 2000 or 2001, a system dubbed "Bugz". It was 
planned to be
a 2-phase appliance system: Phase 1 was scanning e-mail for known
viruses and dropping them. Phase 2 was scanning and _TAGGING_ 
suspected
SPAM e-mail messages. This tagging was two-part: Part 1 was a header
modification that allowed individual clients to set their 
e-mail filters
to do something (delete, move to a spam folder, whatever) to 
e-mail that
_WE_ considered spam; Part 2 was a "rating system" that allowed
individual clients to set their e-mail filters to do 
something (delete,
move to a spam folder, whatever) to e-mail that reached or exceeded a
certain "spam score". I, for example, may want to drop all mail with a
score >= 6, but move into a quarantine box all mail rated 1-5.

We do it this way because we strongly believe we should not 
be deleting
ANYONE's e-mail (unless it contains things that may hurt college
property (eg. malware)). Nor should we be delaying it to their inbox
with a quarantine system. One could _trivially_ do this if they chose
to. I'm not preaching campus culture :). We have had customers say "I
don't want to ever see spam again". When asked "would you be 
willing to
possibly lose legitimate e-mail?" the answer is a firm "no". 

Bugz is currently built w/ 100% open source software. Qmail 
is the MTA.
Amavis and a cadre of helper tools to dissassemble e-mail messages,
ClamAV to scan for viruses and other malware, SpamAssassin to 
do what it
does OH SO WELL, GNU/Linux as the OS w/ Linux 
High-Availability tools to
allow trivial clustering of as many of these as we need. We're moving
towards utility clustering clustering, and this functionality will be
rolled into the main cluster operations.

This is a classic build vs. buy issue. There are shops out there who
choose to buy, there are those who choose to build. I am __BLESSED__
with working in a team of ambitious, innovative, energetic, and
challenging individuals who share my desire to build the best mouse
trap, and save our precious budget dollars for the things we 
can't whip
up with a little bit of elbow grease and brainpower.

The 'cuda is perfectly wonderful product for those who don't have the
privilege of a staff such as ours, or have money to throw at the
problem.

On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 19:42 -0400, Dave Koontz wrote:
Watching this thread, I have a couple questions about the 
'cuda' product.
What exactly does this product do that the free Spam 
Assassin code doesn't?
In other words, why should I pay someone $1000+ dollars 
annually for what
appears to basically be free software bundled on a scaled 
down server.

It looks like the 'cuda' device uses SA version 3.02, which 
is two full
versions behind the SA code branch.... which may frankly 
address some issues
posted here.  Initially, it would seem in the "device" 
world, I might
actually loose a lot of functionality and features that I 
have running the
full fledged product.

So... 

1) How easy is it to upgrade the device to the latest spam 
assassin version?
2) Do users have their own baysian DB's and rules, or are 
they globally
maintained?
3) How easy can users interact with or train the system?
4) Can you easily add your own SA rulesets?  (Custom or SARES)
5) Can the device test & score SPF/DK/DKIM/RBL/SUBL/URIBL results?
6) Does the device support the Razor and/or DCC networks?
7) Does the device support the usage of Grey Listing Technology?

Lastly... Is this product really just a way for a site to 
"easily" use Spam
Assassin without having to invest any time or effort into 
learning the
program?  If so, that's fine, but it may not be as full 
featured as the
product could be.  

If the product does all the above and more... I will 
immediately ask for a
purchase order to save me some precious time!  :-)

---
Dave Koontz
Mary Baldwin College
Staunton VA


-----Original Message-----
From: Justin Sipher [mailto:jsipher () SKIDMORE EDU] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 3:59 PM
To: SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU
Subject: Re: [SECURITY] Barracuda Spam Filter

Add us to the list of schools who are very happy Barracuda users.   
However, I will share a recent story which dampers our 
enthusiasm slightly.
Our single unit (model 600) had a hardware failure 
recently.  It was in this
process that we learned that we had a new "single point of 
failure" in the
e-mail system.  One major problem at the point of the 
failure is that all
mail in the quarantine at the time of the failure was lost. 
 Although most
was SPAM, I do know that I had at least one valid e-mail in 
it.  It was
between when I received the e-mail quarantine summary and 
when I actually
went to retrieve/delete the message when the failure 
occurred.  To prevent
this in the future, we've bought a second one and will have the two
clustered for redundancy.  The second problem we had is that they
**appear** to be a victim of their own success.  At the 
point of the failure
they were out of stock for a replacement even though we 
were at the upgraded
"instant replacement" level.  In our case it took three 
days to get a
replacement and then it was a 400 model to hold us over 
till they could get
a 600.  Not ideal.

I do think they have learned from this (and maybe other) 
incidents and
knowing everything I know now, I'd still buy another one, 
so the up-side is
pretty high to overcome those shortcomings.

...Justin
_______________________________________________________
   Justin Sipher
   Chief Technology Officer
   Skidmore College
   Saratoga Springs, NY
   jsipher () skidmore edu
   518-580-5909
_______________________________________________________

On Jul 25, 2005, at 11:35 AM, Gibbs, Aaron M. wrote:

I'm looking at the Barracuda Spam Filter and would like 
to know if 
anyone is currently using it. If so what your experiences 
have been.

Aaron M Gibbs
Interim Vice President/CIO
Center for Information Technology
St. Augustine's College
919-516-4379 (Office)
919-516-4382 (Fax)
amgibbs () st-aug edu
www.st-aug.edu

-- 

Matthew Keller
Enterprise Systems Analyst
Computing & Technology Services
State University of New York @ Potsdam
Potsdam, NY USA
http://mattwork.potsdam.edu/


Current thread: