Re: Comodo Personal Firewall


Volker Birk wrote:
melih@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Volker Birk wrote:
"melih", would you mind to lear to quote, please? It's very hard to have
a discussion with you, if I must correct your quoting all the time.
You'll find information about this topic here:
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Thank you!
NP. Sorry, i got sloppy with my replies. how do you like the quotations
now :-)

Thank you very much for helping to make it easier to read what you're
posting! ;-)

Well that is the problem: We have not defined a "threat model". When I
made that statement I made it with a threat model in mind that said
"Hacker has access to the machine". In that scenerio I expect the
hacker to be able to extract evertyhing from that machine.

Oops! That would mean, if a cracker has access to that machine,
resistance is futile? Why a "Personal Firewall" then, if you think so?

yes exactly! The threat model Personal Firewall addresses is different
than hacker having access. We have a long way to go as the security
industry to create a secure environment for users! Thats why Comodo
helps at every level from Secure Chip design to making sure the
issuance of digital certificates are to legitimate entities etc etc.


Of course, we need to define attack vectors (or threats) to discuss.
Because we discussed well-known things, I implied a sensible threat
respectively. If you want to explain referring special threats, I would
be pleased.

I was not making a reference to a specific threat model. Just a
statement that PCs are insecure!


Yours,
VB.
--
At first there was the word. And the word was Content-type: text/plain

.

Quantcast