Re: Hijack well-known ports

From: Duane Arnold (notme_at_notme.com)
Date: 04/03/04

  • Next message: Duane Arnold: "Re: question about hardware firewall" 
    Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2004 03:10:18 GMT

    > All I can say is that I hope you aren't involved with network
    > security on behalf of any company I do business with! A "secure
    > company LAN" is only as secure as the weakest link, anywhere on
    > the network.
    >
    > All it would take, to totally compromise such a network, is ONE
    > road warrior with a laptop that's allowed back on the network,
    > without a total scan for viruses AND trojans AND unknown processes.
    >

    I am not going to get involved with this, that, and the other with you on
    this. It's not my job to provide security solutions for the company. That's
    someone else's responsibility to be held accountable for whatever issues the
    company may have concerning security of the company LAN.

    There has been no companies that I have worked for as an employee or
    consulted with that installed personal FW(s) on desktop machines in a secure
    LAN situation. And I have been in a number of large companies in the last
    few years.

    As I explained earlier, they do have host based FW(s) installed on tele
    commuter workstations and for those who are on the road with their laptops.
    The company also provides a router solution if requested, if it can be
    justified. All of the machines have an AV solution installed.

    Is anyone going to show up at someone's desk requesting that they do a scan
    of someone machine before they connect to the LAN again with the 100(s) of
    employees that have this ability, forget about it.

    Most companies are not going to run around installing PFW solutions on
    desktop machines in a secure LAN situation. It may not be what is the
    prudent choice, but that is what is happening in most companies, like it or
    not.

    If you have a problem with that, then take it up with those who may be
    receptive to your view point.:)

    I am not one of them. :)

    Duane :)

  • Next message: Duane Arnold: "Re: question about hardware firewall"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: NAT external/Public IP
      ... On 2007-10-30 Security Incidents wrote: ... It doesn't make a host any more or less ... secure than it already is. ... public IP addresses in your LAN means that the firewall at the ...
      (Security-Basics)
    • Re: wireless security
      ... It increases security even for private LANs. ... ISP clueful enough to offer VPN ... If we browsing at a secure site, ... The exposure I had in mind is that someone might tap into a wired LAN. ...
      (alt.internet.wireless)
    • Re: WOL security issue
      ... issue if somebody inside our LAN is infected with malware. ... WOL itself is not a security issue. ... it needs to know the MAC address of the ethernet card. ...
      (alt.internet.wireless)
    • Re: Unauthorised switchport access
      ... Your LAN becomes a major target to ... And don't be pacified into a false sense of security by VLANs they are ... Lock all non used switchports and enable a "sticky" MAC learning ... Look into Network Access Control, even if you don't want to ...
      (Security-Basics)
    • Re: A new concept for security management?
      ... Creating a LAN is no problem. ... What they'd still be missing is active security. ... >bare-bones LAN for the company and let an MSSP provide the security. ... Anti-Virus software with auto-updating. ...
      (Security-Basics)