Re: [Full-Disclosure] Re: Gates: 'You don't need perfect code' for good security
From: Peter Moody (peter_at_ucsc.edu)
Date: 10/31/03
- Previous message: adam.richards: "RE: [Full-Disclosure] Proxies"
- In reply to: Kenneth R. van Wyk: "[Full-Disclosure] Re: Gates: 'You don't need perfect code' for good security"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
To: "Kenneth R. van Wyk" <ken@vanwyk.org> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 14:39:12 -0800
> First, firewalling and patching can not in fact shield networks from
> all of the impact of worms and viruses. Ask any experienced network
> admin. There will always be users who bring into a firewalled network
> a laptop that was, for example, infected at home. Once that infected
> laptop is connected to the enterprise, the firewall is irrelevant.
Host based firewalling will take care of this. I don't care who you are
or where I am, but my computer is my "crown jewel" and I'm not going to
let any packet touch it that I don't want touching it. I'm pretty sure
that's what Gates was talking about; if you click on the "secure your pc
1-2-3" link on any of the ms.com webpages, their suggestion is to turn
on the host-based firewall. There's no mention of dropping money for a
cisco pix or nokia/checkpoint solution.
-Peter
-- Peter Moody <peter@ucsc.edu> Information Security Administrator 831/459.5409 Communications and Technology Services. http://mustard.ucsc.edu/pubkey UC, Santa Cruz. :wq
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
- application/pgp-signature attachment: This is a digitally signed message part
- Previous message: adam.richards: "RE: [Full-Disclosure] Proxies"
- In reply to: Kenneth R. van Wyk: "[Full-Disclosure] Re: Gates: 'You don't need perfect code' for good security"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|