Re: [fw-wiz] Locking down public wireless access

From: David Lang (david.lang_at_digitalinsight.com)
Date: 02/24/05

  • Next message: David Lang: "Re: [fw-wiz] Username password VS hardware token plus PIN"
    To: "Dale W. Carder" <dwcarder@doit.wisc.edu>
    Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:21:08 -0800 (PST)
    
    

    On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, Dale W. Carder wrote:

    > - Roll out a "captive portal" style network admission box. The captive
    > portal also strongly encourages the use of VPN (and allows them to get the
    > client before allowed through) when on the wireless network, but acts as a
    > fallback mechanism for those without: the vpn client, clue, admin on their
    > machines, or who are otherwise guests.
    >
    > There's several free captive portal thingys out there like NoCatAuth,
    > PacketFence, and then the vendors like Perfigo (now vendor C), BlueSocket,
    > and BSi. We found that they all had limitations one way or another, so
    > choose your poison carefully!

    Dale, any chance of getting you to list the limitations that you ran into
    to save the rest of us some research time? :-)

    David Lang

    -- 
    There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies.
      -- C.A.R. Hoare
    _______________________________________________
    firewall-wizards mailing list
    firewall-wizards@honor.icsalabs.com
    http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
    

  • Next message: David Lang: "Re: [fw-wiz] Username password VS hardware token plus PIN"