Re: [fw-wiz] iso 17799

From: Darren Reed (darrenr_at_reed.wattle.id.au)
Date: 07/21/04

  • Next message: Paul D. Robertson: "Re: [fw-wiz] iso 17799" 
    To: "Marcus J. Ranum" <mjr@ranum.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 21:25:13 +1000 (EST)

    In some email I received from Marcus J. Ranum, sie wrote:
    > Well, security's the same way: if you only do smart safe stuff,
    > you won't get hacked. If you buy a $100,000 security doo-dad
    > that makes sure you only do smart safe stuff, you won't get hacked.
    > But the actual presence of the $100,000 doo-dad has relatively
    > little to do with it other than making the vendor happy and giving
    > the stupid suits you work for something to point at that has
    > neat-o blinky lights. It's a con.

    Well, it's likely to be easier to buy a $100k thing and say "no activex"
    than to try roll your own or enforce such a policy at the desktop level,
    especially if you have an intraweb.

    Darren
    _______________________________________________
    firewall-wizards mailing list
    firewall-wizards@honor.icsalabs.com
    http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards

  • Next message: Paul D. Robertson: "Re: [fw-wiz] iso 17799"