Great Circle Associates Firewalls
(November 1997)
 

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

Subject: RE: sex,lies, and application proxy based fw vs Check Point
From: "Paul D. Robertson" <proberts @ clark . net>
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 1997 13:10:03 -0500 (EST)
To: Russ <Russ . Cooper @ rc . on . ca>, firewalls @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to: <Pine . LNX . 3 . 91 . 971102111711 . 265C-100000 @ gargoyle>

On Sun, 2 Nov 1997, Paul D. Robertson wrote:

> Which doesn't mean that a number of people haven't done such tests.  I 
> think your predicates may hold true for 'most customers', but that 
> different predicates, and resultant answers should apply for security 
> professionals.  Just because you, or your customers, or your company 
> (genericly, not personally) can't do valid tests doesn't make valid tests 

Because I wasn't particularly clear here, "genericly, not personally" was 
meant to change the statement to mean that it applied to a generic set of 
people, not Russ in particular.  I was in no way casting aspersions on 
Russ' abilities to perform tests, and apologize if it seemed that way.

Paul
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Robertson      "My statements in this message are personal opinions
proberts @
 clark .
 net      which may have no basis whatsoever in fact."
                                                                     PSB#9280



References:
Indexed By Date Previous: RE: sex,lies, and application proxy based fw vs Check Point
From: Russ <Russ . Cooper @ rc . on . ca>
Next: RE: sex,lies, and application proxy based fw vs Check Point
From: "Paul D. Robertson" <proberts @ clark . net>
Indexed By Thread Previous: RE: sex,lies, and application proxy based fw vs Check Point
From: "Paul D. Robertson" <proberts @ clark . net>
Next: RE: sex,lies, and application proxy based fw vs Check Point
From: Russ <Russ . Cooper @ rc . on . ca>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com