Great Circle Associates Firewalls
(December 1996)
 

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

Subject: NT vs. UNIX Firewall positioning
From: "Stout, Bill" <bill . stout @ hidata . com>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 11:26:29 -0800
To: "'Firewall List'" <firewalls @ GreatCircle . COM>
Cc: "'avolio @ tis . com'" <avolio @ tis . com>, "'emily @ us . checkpoint . com'" <emily @ us . checkpoint . com>, "'dlancaster @ raptor . com'" <dlancaster @ raptor . com>

I would like to ask that vendors speak up on the NT vs. UNIX Firewall 
issue.  Please answer with technical facts and not with canned 
marketing replies which mumble about market_demands, 
customer_preferences, or with obscure 'religious' justification.

Hopefully I've cc'd the correct spokesmen at the three major 
companies off the top of my head, other spokesmen/people are
requested to reply to the list.

     Raptor Eagle    vs. Raptor Eagle NT
     TIS Gauntlet    vs. TIS Gauntlet NT
     Checkpoint FW-1 vs. Checkpoint FW-1 NT
     Others...

How do vendors position Firewall software when available on both NT 
and UNIX platforms?  

Are NT versions positioned primarily as Intranet firewalls, or as 
primary corporate firewalls?  

  If so, is this because of newness of the operating system, or 
  decisions to provide reduced features on the NT platform?

Can your company state that your NT version is as secure as your
UNIX version, or does UNIX have additional security enhancements?

Can you state that your NT version has or will have all features
available on your UNIX version?

Thanks in advance,

Bill Stout


Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Strange log in my Firewall
From: Joe Loiacono <jloiacon @ csc . com>
Next: RE: SMTPD gateway
From: Chris Pugrud <ChrisP @ steldyn . com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Dual-porting of DMZ systems, why?
From: Frank Willoughby <frankw @ in . net>
Next: SATAN Survey
From: Christopher Klaus <cklaus @ iss . net>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com