Re: Is Firewall essential in this case?



Sebastian Gottschalk <seppi@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

Todd H. wrote:

Sebastian Gottschalk <seppi@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
You may want to differ between a discussion on a certain topic between
opposing persons, and a discussion about a person himself in context of a
previous discussion about a topic. Since the sub-thread starting at
<news:tzPth.20615$KQ2.15256@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> you should have notice the
difference.

Sebastian, you're practically a celebrity here! You're a legend!

And you're a fool who really doesn't understand what a "Followup-To:
poster" is good for.

I noticed it, processed it, deleted it.

(And I'm the fool who doesn't set up a proper default filter for threads
ending in a fup2p. Sure, there are exception, but they're rare.)

You've got some extreme views on things dismissing them as "worthless"
yet somehow they're extremely popular standard precautions (AV + some
sort off desktop firewall software) used by every IT firm in the
Fortune 100 including those offering security services themselves.

What a bullshit.

1. Which Fortune 100 company uses some sort of desktop firewalls?

There are many! The ones I'm most involved with I'm under NDA with so
I can't say those specifically, but here's one public source
indicating Novell and EDS as Zonelabs Integrity Desktop clients:

http://www.zonelabs.com/store/content/company/successStories/technology.jsp?dc=12bms&ctry=US&lang=en

Symantec's personal firewall is also out there in numbers in very
large corporate environments. Do you think they'll rely solely on a
thoroughly non-centrally-configurable windows firewall for their
laptop wielding road warriors who are connected in a variety of
situations that aren't totally controllable?

This all makes me wonder what environments you're working in where
this is actually news to you.

2. Which Fortune 100 company uses virus scanners which are utilized and
administrated by the clueless users instead of competent administrators?
And which one relies on it as a protective rather than an inflating measure
(which it simply is)?

Probably none/few. Central administration of av updates is the order
of the day. I challenge you to find one company that subscribed to
the Sebastian "we don't need no steekin AV, it's ineffective"
Sebastian way.

And clueful companies also know that AV doesn't eliminate the malware
risk--it merely mitigates a percentage of the threats, and provides a
means of logging known threats that do get detected.

But your nice strawman argument is duly noted.

3. Which Fortune 100 company has an IT environment that is way less messy
than almost any other company network? Being a Fortune 100 doesn't
make them any more special and especially doesn't imply that their
IT environment would be superior in any way, just because they're
economically successful.

You may have missed that I qualified it to be _IT_ companies that are
in the Fortune 100. They didn't get there by being Very Wrong about IT
matters.

The point is: large number of IT companies' practices, and consultants
for them who have measurable business success in the field vs a guy
named Sebastian who says AV and desktop firewall products are
worthless because they can be evaded.

--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/
.