Re: IMO
From: Eirik Seim (eirik@mi.uib.no)Date: 04/29/02
- Next message: x y: "Re: Watchguard & Netscreen"
- Previous message: x y: "Re: Security in DMZ itself"
- In reply to: me: "IMO"
- Next in thread: x y: "Re: IMO"
- Reply: x y: "Re: IMO"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: eirik@mi.uib.no (Eirik Seim) Date: 29 Apr 2002 14:44:43 GMT
On Mon, 29 Apr 2002 22:12:48 +1000, me wrote:
> After spending the better part of two hours reading the posts of this ng
> dating back only as far as 27/02/2002, I must
> say that the information offered is not bad. Im glad to see that the
> user "Tracker" has not responded lately.
I hope, for her own sake, that she's been studying network protocols :)
> A word of advise for some. Dont offer advise that could hold you liable.
> Changes in the world security arena has already
> offer two companies legal rights to sue an individual directly related
> to information offered in a ng.
I guess you are talking about the US. For a country where people sue
McDonalds[1] for not labeling their coffe mugs with 'caution! hot!', and
actually win their trial, I'm not surprised.
Any person, or company, that trusts the usenet (or the internet in general)
to always contain correct information simply deserve to be out of business.
Are you saying some company has actually sued someone for misinformation
on usenet? If so, any references?
> In reality, a firewall is only as good as the rule set. Unfortunately,
> most people dont understand that port 520 is one
> of the unsung heroes of current problems.
..and the rule set is only as good as the person maintaining it. RIP and
the likes, including ICMP type 5, is not what you want to affect your
firewalling unless carefully planned (load balancing, etc). I tought this
was common knowledge?
> Good hunting and enjoy the openness of the net.
And the same to you :)
- Eirik
1. I don't know if this is a true story. It's nice, though.
-- New and exciting signature!
- Next message: x y: "Re: Watchguard & Netscreen"
- Previous message: x y: "Re: Security in DMZ itself"
- In reply to: me: "IMO"
- Next in thread: x y: "Re: IMO"
- Reply: x y: "Re: IMO"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|