Re: Defense in Depth
From: Daniel Miessler (daniel_at_dmiessler.com)
Date: 10/31/04
- Previous message: Nathaniel Hall: "Re: Allowing scanning from home"
- Next in thread: Naren: "Re: Defense in Depth"
- Maybe reply: Naren: "Re: Defense in Depth"
- Maybe reply: Javier Blanque: "Re: Defense in Depth"
- Maybe reply: Spencer Hall: "Re: Defense in Depth"
- Maybe reply: Miles Stevenson: "Re: Defense in Depth"
- Maybe reply: sf_mail_sbm_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Defense in Depth"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 04:20:43 -0500 To: Ravi Kumar <ravivsn@rocsys.com>
On Oct 29, 2004, at 1:35 AM, Ravi Kumar wrote:
> Why do you prefer two firewalls? Does that mean are you not confident
> enough with the first firewall capabilities!!
Ravi,
Notice the name of his post. It's called "Defense In Depth". It's a
concept all its own that you should look into. It's based on the idea
of making it so that more than one layer of defense needs to be
circumvented before an attacker can get what he wants.
Look into it. I think you'll find it both interesting and beneficial.
-Daniel R. Miessler
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
- Previous message: Nathaniel Hall: "Re: Allowing scanning from home"
- Next in thread: Naren: "Re: Defense in Depth"
- Maybe reply: Naren: "Re: Defense in Depth"
- Maybe reply: Javier Blanque: "Re: Defense in Depth"
- Maybe reply: Spencer Hall: "Re: Defense in Depth"
- Maybe reply: Miles Stevenson: "Re: Defense in Depth"
- Maybe reply: sf_mail_sbm_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Defense in Depth"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]