Great Circle Associates Firewalls
(September 1996)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: FW-1 - less secure ?
From: "Gerard D. Cochrane Jr." <gdcochra @ utep . edu>
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 03:02:22 -0600 (MDT)
To: Darren Reed <avalon @ coombs . anu . edu . au>
Cc: DOA <klynn @ cyberspace . com>, Firewalls @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to: <199609290830 . BAA03610 @ miles . greatcircle . com>

On Sun, 29 Sep 1996, Darren Reed wrote:

> > In my experience I'd favor gauntlet as it is a true application level
> > proxy gateway. Firewall-1 which is supposed to perform as the fastest
> > firewall around is unfortunately a hybrid packet filtering firewall
> > therefore it is somewhat less secure (depending on how you setup your
> > site of course).
> 
> Interestingly, I heard some gossip recently that Checkpoint (& Sun)
> weren't sure if Firewall-1 (or any firewall with FW-1 installed) could
> "Fail safe".
> 
> Darren
> 
	Fuck you dildo you wanna see a REALLY secure system.. try to hack
MINE.. IM UNHACKABLE.. you stupid panzys cant do shit stupid bastards..
Lick my balls.. you little BOYS.. lick em'... go away idiots.. your all to
stupid for me to be asociating myself with.



Follow-Ups:
References:
Indexed By Date Previous: FW-1 - less secure ?
From: Darren Reed <avalon @ coombs . anu . edu . au>
Next: Re: SOLARIS x86 as firewall platform?
From: sthaug @ nethelp . no
Indexed By Thread Previous: FW-1 - less secure ?
From: Darren Reed <avalon @ coombs . anu . edu . au>
Next: Re: FW-1 - less secure ?
From: Ron DuFresne <dufresne @ winternet . com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com