Is virus scanning interception - The final word??

[Quentin Campbell]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roland Perry [mailto:roland@linx.net]=20
> Sent: 26 July 2002 16:57
> To: ukcrypto@chiark.greenend.org.uk
> Subject: Re: Is virus scanning interception - The final word??
>=20
[snip]
> By quarantining I mean putting into a a separate mailbox for=20
> more controlled access/deletion by the intended recipient, or=20
> the intended recipient with specific and solicited help from=20
> the sysadmins.
>=20
> If the sysadmins look at the quarantined emails themselves, I=20
> think that would be interception (but you can make it a=20
> lawful interception by taking the right precautions).

I do not know of an A-V system that quarantines infected
attachments/messages into a separate mailbox also owned and accessible
by the intended recipient. This is why we have a problem with
"quarantine" because of RIPA, and now, DPA considerations.

MailScanner (http://www.sng.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailscanner) which is one of
the more popular and widely used content scanners (it can interface to a
range of commercial A-V products) quarantines infected attachments on
the mail relay on which they were detected. A third party human is
required to make the quaratined item available to the intended recipient
if they ask for it.
=20
Quentin
---
PHONE: +44 191 222 8209    Computing Service, University of Newcastle
FAX:   +44 191 222 8765    Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom, NE1 7RU.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Any opinion expressed above is mine. The University can get its own."=20