I agree very strongly with your comments here. I was in the process of
mulling over a very similar message over my favorite brew, but you beat me
Some comments to add....
I believe that we can agree that NT will not disappear over-night (pretty
safe assumption even if we all stopped buying it right now). And we can
probably agree that users will not stop wishing/trying/attempting to build
secure firewalls on their NT boxes. Perhaps what I would wish for more
than a haggle over the philosophical reasons (like UNIX has been tested
for much longer) is to see a medium for testing/experimenting/discovering
the bugs in NT and giving them the same forum we have from CERT, BOS and
bugtraq (et.al.) I really think it would be wonderful if Micro$oft would
participate in CERT so that much of the same information would be
available. User and public pressure has been known to occassionally sway
the boys in Redmond....
I'd rather see the stuff put to the test, explored and proven or debunked
- this is how UNIX became what it is and why some of us hold it in such
high esteem for security - we've beaten it up and trust it since we know
it. Linux is going through the same process....if NT wants to play, lets
get it out on the track and put it through the paces (and some nasty
hairpin curves to boot) and see where it does well and where it breaks
down and where it shines.....and lets talk about these issues.
The debates between the camps are often interesting - as long as they
stick to the nuts and bolts and not the metaphysics of why one is better.
I could care less about market share or "crushing the competition". I
care about whether it works.
My $0.02 (and change)
On Wed, 11 Dec 1996, C Matthew Curtin wrote:
> Actually, I'd prefer to keep the NT, OS/2, Plan 9, and other folks ON
> the list here. For a number of reasons (none of which are to continue
> browbeating the disciples of Bill ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H
> NT folks.)
> 1. Those who are interested in *firewalls* will probably have an
> interest in them in more platforms than just Unix, or NT, etc. I
> myself welcome the contribution of folks like Russ who make
> contributions to the list, and our understanding of making NT work
> in firewalls. (Russ and I probably represent nearly the exact
> opposite viewpoints about the implementation specifics of
> firewalling. As a result, we argue back and forth sometimes, but I
> hope that it isn't completely unproductive. If nothing else, it
> should make people better understand what it means to run NT in
> firewalls, and what it means to run Unix in firewalls.)
Daniel Blander =8^)
Sr. Systems Engineer Applied Computer Solutions
Phone: (714) 842.7800 Fax: (714) 842.8299
Email: Daniel .
The Official Applied Computer Solutions Home Page
and Tech Tip of the Week: