PDA

View Full Version : AV Blade vs. Traditional AV



sebastan_bach
2016-08-19, 15:03
Hi,

I am wondering is there a document mentioning the difference between the two AV engines. I have read in the documentation that we cannot use both the engines together. So is there any specific functionality for which we might want to use the traditional AV engine over the AV blade. Does the traditional AV engines comes default with the gateway as there is no blade or licensing for the same.

I am not sure if this is true that the traditional AV engine supports all the protocols for scanning as compared to the AV blade.

Any insights on the same would be great.

Regards

Sebastan

aweldon
2016-08-22, 13:56
I asked a similar question awhile back. But, it will scan on http/any port, smtp, and https if you have inspection enabled.

https://www.cpug.org/forums/showthread.php/20850-Threat-Prevention-and-Traditional-Anti-Virus

sebastan_bach
2016-08-25, 19:46
Thanks for your response mate.

Looks like I would have to switch it to traditional AV for having support for FTP. For traditional AV do we still need to buy the AV blade or the traditional AV is part of the standard licenses with the gateway.

Regards

Sebastan

sebastan_bach
2016-10-28, 17:23
I asked a similar question awhile back. But, it will scan on http/any port, smtp, and https if you have inspection enabled.

https://www.cpug.org/forums/showthread.php/20850-Threat-Prevention-and-Traditional-Anti-Virus

Hey,

Just a correction I received from a check point SE is that SMB scanning is supported with AV blade but unfortunately there is no option to set any configurations for that. But its enabled by default. For FTP there's a patch that is required for enabling the AV scanning for FTP. Only AV scanning for POP3 & IMAP are not supported.

Regards

Sebastan

aweldon
2016-10-31, 10:19
Interesting, thanks for the update on that.