Re: [fw-wiz] i-cap proposals

From: Paul D. Robertson (paul_at_compuwar.net)
Date: 02/22/05

  • Next message: Marcus J. Ranum: "RE: [fw-wiz] Application-level Attacks" 
    To: ArkanoiD <ark@eltex.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 08:31:01 -0500 (EST)

    On Sat, 19 Feb 2005, ArkanoiD wrote:

    > Because people need access to their personal mailboxes out in the internet
    > from the workplace, and environtments fascist enough to prohibit them

    There's a difference between "need" and "want." People also want to take
    things from the workplace that don't belong to them, but we don't allow
    that behavior.

    > from doing it are not that common at all. So there should be a way to
    > minimize risks without being BOFH.
    >

    No- security is based on blocking. The less you allow, the less risk you
    assume. It's that simple. Every extra thing you allow increases your
    risk in an unquantifyable manner. When it's vectors like E-mail where
    there's a high attack rate, then you're increasing risk significantly,
    because we don't have good protections for Windows desktops for new
    malware.

    My take's always been that if you want to do personal e-mail, do it on
    your time, on your machine. If you can negotiate otherwise, fine, but the
    generic drooling desktop user doesn't get to play at work.

    My other take is that it works from most places simply because "Anything
    out, state or ACK back" is the sum total of most site's firewall rulesets.

    I've never been anywhere that had a real security policy where mail reader
    protocols were allowed to external systems.

    Paul
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Paul D. Robertson "My statements in this message are personal opinions
    paul@compuwar.net which may have no basis whatsoever in fact."
    _______________________________________________
    firewall-wizards mailing list
    firewall-wizards@honor.icsalabs.com
    http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards

  • Next message: Marcus J. Ranum: "RE: [fw-wiz] Application-level Attacks"

    Relevant Pages

    • One for TOG - Health & Safety
      ... It appears that the HSE have identified a risk associated with too many ... H&S signs in the workplace - which dilutes the effect of the really ...
      (uk.rec.motorcycles)
    • Re: The smoking ban in France...
      ... hand smoke IS currently regulated in the workplace. ... hand smoke IS currently regulated in the workplace." ... risk to ones health as second hand smoke IS currently regulated in the ... In that sense many toxins "equivalent [in[risk to ones ...
      (rec.music.gdead)
    • Re: The smoking ban in France...
      ... hand smoke IS currently regulated in the workplace. ... "Pretty much everything of equivalent risk to ones health as second ... hand smoke IS currently regulated in the workplace." ... risk to ones health as second hand smoke IS currently regulated in the ...
      (rec.music.gdead)
    • Trust and Risk in the Workplace
      ... Dr. Monica Whitty (Queens University of Northern Ireland) is doing a ... study on "Trust and Risk in the Workplace." ... it's kind that will analyze workplace use of computers. ...
      (comp.security.misc)
    • Trust and Risk in the Workplace
      ... Dr. Monica Whitty (Queens University of Northern Ireland) is doing a ... study on "Trust and Risk in the Workplace." ... it's kind that will analyze workplace use of computers. ...
      (alt.true-crime)