Re: SBS not for everyone?
- From: <wedor>
- Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:22:42 -0500
"Leythos" <void@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:2LU5f.86394$tD4.11565@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> In article <O8wv8Db1FHA.3256@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <wedor> says...
>> I'm merely quoting a known and respected source when it comes to this
>> subject, you are welcome to avoid listening to anything I have to say.
>>
>> If you take exception to what has been written I would suggest you take
>> it
>> up with the author.
>
> I appreciate that you follow their recommendations, but, you might want
> to ask why instead of just following them.
>
> In the case of every network we've protected, every compromised network
> we've cleaned, in the case of every uncompromised network we maintained
> from the start, it never included a firewall application running on a
> non-dedicated piece of hardware/server.
>
>> I have little choice in my view but to take the word of isa.org over the
>> "untold number of
>> > installations where firewall appliances have proven to be more than
>> > capable at protecting a network/networks at all the levels and more
>> > than
>> > ISA would on a server"
>>
>> I see little or no documentation to back up your claim, if you would care
>> to
>> provide some I would be happy to read it.
>
> And you won't, but you will find it in many security best practices
> documents that are not published by someone with a bested interest in
> the firewall product they are promoting. What I mean is that I follow
> the standards that I feel work best based on 20+ years of experience,
> testing, design, implementation, and follow the trends/ideas that others
> present and implement when they have merit.
>
>> I don't recall saying ISA was the only way but I don't know that it is
>> not a
>> valid way anymore than I can say yours is the only way.
>
> Have you ever design firewall/security solutions for corporations?
>
> Have you ever had a compromised network that you designed for a
> corporation?
>
> Have you ever design/architected a solution with 10+ branch offices
> across several cities, remote clients, business partners, and also
> running process control system in real time?
>
> You don't have to believe anything I say here, that's the nice thing
> about Usenet. What you should be doing is determining why you believe
> that ISA on a server, exposed to the world, is a good idea.
>
> Rather than us go back and forth, and I'm not arguing with you, just
> talking here, why don't you tell us why you believe that a server with
> Customer Data, Accounting Data, Social Security Numbers, business
> documents with trade secrets, etc... should be directly exposed to the
> Internet in any manner?
>
And where excatly did I say that so I require an explanation for it?
>
> spam999free@xxxxxxxxxx
> remove 999 in order to email me
.
- References:
- Re: SBS not for everyone?
- From: wedor
- Re: SBS not for everyone?
- Prev by Date: Re: ISA 2004 fails to install with SBS 2003 Premium CD
- Next by Date: Re: Remote Connection Issue
- Previous by thread: Re: SBS not for everyone?
- Next by thread: Re: SBS not for everyone?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|