Re: NetBEUI and security
From:Date: 10/29/02
- Next message: W. B.: "Re: VPN to Netscreen 100"
- Previous message: : "SonicWALL filtering of Usenet"
- In reply to: Calvin Crumrine: "Re: NetBEUI and security"
- Next in thread: John Blow: "Re: NetBEUI and security"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 12:52:37 -0600
Yeah, I guess I read that wrong. Looks like the question has been answered
by others in the thread, so I won't get redundant.
"Calvin Crumrine" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
news:3DBED2F3.3070306@example.net...
> W. B. wrote:
> >>Since there is no way to 'control' traffic at
> >>a low level, (unlike TCP/IP and firewalls etc.) does this actually
> >>increase risk, for example trojans 'information gathering' unseen via
> >>NetBEUI?
> >
> >
> > I would think this would be a moot point, If you are using exclusively a
> > non-routable protocol, there would be no way for the trojan to 'phone
home'
> > anyway. Your LAN would be exactly that, and only that; a Local Area
> > Network.
> >
> > This sounds like a good plan security wise, but I would study the
> > implications to make sure you know what you are getting into from a
network
> > functionality standpoint. How to get users access to E-mail comes to
mind.
> > Exchange?
> >
> > "craig" <craig.athome@virgin.net> wrote in message
> > news:26ca3cec.0210281207.7a14b8a2@posting.google.com...
> >
> >>Hi folks,
> >>
> >>I'm considering using NetBEUI on a small network with internet access,
> >>for file and print sharing. i.e remove TCP/IP bindings from the
> >>networking client.
> >>My motivation for this is simply another layer of security, due to the
> >>non routable nature of NetBEUI.
> >>
> >>The network is only about 40 users so I'm ok with the viability of
> >>NetBEUI, however I wondered what the opinion was on security
> >>implications as a whole. Since there is no way to 'control' traffic at
> >>a low level, (unlike TCP/IP and firewalls etc.) does this actually
> >>increase risk, for example trojans 'information gathering' unseen via
> >>NetBEUI?
> >>
> >>Any thoughts on the matter appreciated
> >>
> >>TIA
> >>Craig
> >
> >
> >
>
> If I'm reading it correctly, he's loading TCP/IP for Internet access-but
> not bound to the network client or to file & printer sharing. And he's
> also loading NETBEUI for LAN access, binding it to the network client &
> to file & printer sharing. Therefore, not only would the clients have
> email access but any Trojans would also be able to phone home.
>
- Next message: W. B.: "Re: VPN to Netscreen 100"
- Previous message: : "SonicWALL filtering of Usenet"
- In reply to: Calvin Crumrine: "Re: NetBEUI and security"
- Next in thread: John Blow: "Re: NetBEUI and security"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
