Re: VPN Client Security
- From: Paul Adare - MVP <pkadare@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 05:17:43 -0400
On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 01:34:01 -0700, Dan wrote:
So using a multi-layered security and safety approach is good. BTW, why do
we still only use 128 bit cipher strength so frequently and why not upgrade
the entire industry to start using 168 bit cipher strength as a new bare
minimum.
What do you mean "upgrade the entire industry"? No one uses 168-bit
encryption and for good reason. Vista supports AES128, AES256, and 3DES.
One thing I do like about Windows Live One Care is the ability to
customize what you let in and out of your computer with the firewall by
allowing or blocking it.
And your point is? The Vista firewall by itself provides this ability, no
need for OneCare on top of it.
In addition, shouldn't all company networks have
the sort of firewall that Zone Alarm Professional reporting has so at least
the company can try to figure out where the port scan is coming from even if
the port scan is being hidden through numerous points throughout the world
And in your vast experience company networks don't have this already? BTW -
what you're talking about is an Intrusion Detection System (IDS) and not a
firewall, however, any enterprise level firewall will have good reporting
features.
--
Paul Adare
MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager
http://www.identit.ca
Transistor: A sibling, opposite of transbrother.
.
- References:
- VPN Client Security
- From: David
- RE: VPN Client Security
- From: Anteaus
- RE: VPN Client Security
- From: Dan
- VPN Client Security
- Prev by Date: RE: Source Code
- Next by Date: Re: VPN Client Security
- Previous by thread: RE: VPN Client Security
- Next by thread: Re: VPN Client Security
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
