RE: Reasons not to run normal AV on E2K server???? ?

  • From: "Mulnick, Al" <Al.Mulnick@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "'[ExchangeList]'" <exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 12:32:35 -0500

What?  That the permissions will get corrupt?  

Why is it even a possibility when your AV vendor recommends that you not do
this?  If your AV vendor recommends otherwise, perhaps now is a good time to
reevanlutate and contact Microsoft to get that vendor corrected before they
do any damage.

That said, this q explains exactly what will likely happen (First regular
sentence after more information).

-----Original Message-----
From: KEN MORRIS [mailto:KMORRIS@xxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:22 PM
To: [ExchangeList]
Subject: [exchangelist] Reasons not to run normal AV on E2K server?????

I know that I have read it somewhere, but cannot find the article, or
reference as to why. What I am looking for is supporting documentation to
show why A "Normal" AV solution will corrupt the E2K M drive. I have
searched through MS and not found what I wanted..... Can anyone supply me
with a reference to show that this is a fact? Thank you Ken

List Archives:
Exchange Newsletters:
Exchange FAQ:
Other Internet Software Marketing Sites:
Leading Network Software Directory: No.1 ISA
Server Resource Site: Windows Security Resource
Site: Network Security Library: Windows 2000/NT Fax Solutions:

Other related posts: