Great Circle Associates Firewalls
(August 1996)
 

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

Subject: RE: No More Unlimited User Licenses Please...
From: Chris Pugrud <ChrisP @ steldyn . com>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 09:07:49 -0600
To: "'Russ'" <Russ . Cooper @ RC . Toronto . on . ca>, "'Benedikt Stockebrand'" <benedikt @ devnull . ruhr . de>
Cc: Firewalls Mailing list <firewalls @ greatcircle . com>

The problem is not that these companies are not employing
Data/network/computer security people, it's the people that they are
employing.  I have seen several companies where the security admin was
(or still is) the mainframe security admin (AKA RAC-F programmer).  Most
of the mainframe security people that I have dealt with have been
clueless about PCs and LANs (No, not you! don't get all fired up) -
generally in organizations where they feel it is cost effective to pay a
50% premium for a "Compaq" or "IBM" sticker on a PC.  Many "big
business" companies have yet to figure out that PCs and Mainframe are
completely different animals and need to be approached with a different
state of mind.
Whether to use a COTS or home-brew firewall is a business decision. 
Having a security admin that is not thoroughly familiar with the
PC/Mainframe is as stupid as having a CIO that barely knows how to turn
on a computer (don't laugh, I can name a few of them).

Chris
 - just my 25000 bits worth

>----------
>From: 	Benedikt Stockebrand[SMTP:benedikt @
 devnull .
 ruhr .
 de]
>Sent: 	Saturday, August 17, 1996 8:12 AM
>To: 	Russ
>Cc: 	Firewalls Mailing list
>Subject: 	Re: No More Unlimited User Licenses Please...
>
>Russ <Russ .
 Cooper @
 RC .
 Toronto .
 on .
 ca> writes:
>
>> And please don't jump on me saying you can do it yourself
>> cheaply; education costs, book costs, software costs, hardware costs,
>> labor costs (even if it is one of your own employees), then add the cost
>> of the risk that it hasn't been done properly, then add the costs
>> associated with losing the person who rolled it....it adds up and can be
>> just as expensive if not more than buying a premade solution.
>
>This all surely holds for small companies with moderate security
>problems.  But these expenses may be a minor problem: From a certain
>size on any reasonable company with serious security concerns will
>consider a ``computer/network security expert'' a cheap insurance (as
>compared to ``physical'' security personnel for example).  Rolling
>your own firewall gets you a better understanding than using pre-built
>stuff, provided you've got the time to do it properly.  But big
>business may be unable to wait for your hand-rolled firewall to go
>operational.  Time is money, and sometimes lots of it.
>
>
>    Ben
>
>-- 
>Ben(edikt)? Stockebrand    Runaway ping.de Admin---Never Ever Trust Old
>Friends
>My name and email address are not to be added to any list used for
>advertising
>purposes.  Any sender of unsolicited advertisement e-mail to this
>address im-
>plicitly agrees to pay a DM 500 fee to the recipient for proofreading
>services.
>

Indexed By Date Previous: Re: RFCs
From: "Alex F" <alexf @ iss . net>
Next: RE: NT Memory (formerly NT Firewalling)
From: Chris Pugrud <ChrisP @ steldyn . com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: No More Unlimited User Licenses Please...
From: "David S. Ridlon" <ohdavy @ pe . net>
Next: huh? switch hitter? (fwd)
From: Ryan Mooney <ryan @ pcslink . com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com