the pricing on that power would be crazy for that much user traffic. The fortinet solution we looked at once was upwards of 200k for a network our size at the time, how do you recoup that from 500 customers? wait... I see what this whole thing is about, nothing to do with protecting children, its about the subsidies and the contracts. now it all makes sense. i wonder which vendors have lobbyists pushing this
On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Dave <[email protected]> wrote: > Does Barracuda have anything that extravagant? > > You would have to have a service that has the ability to dynamically keep > up with the changes and multi layers of how these things can be transported. > Ports is only one layer but then you have Regex or layer 7 and maybe dns. > the layer7 stuff is very cpu intensive. > > > On 02/06/2018 10:18 AM, Seth Mattinen wrote: > > On 2/6/18 7:48 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > I have some proposed legislation I am facing about porn blocking again. > But they are not defining the type of service. It is one thing to block > web traffic, but how about netflix or twitter or skype or...... > I want to play defense here and force the lawmakers to define exactly what > we need to block. > So can you guys help me develop a list of all the things we would have to > analyze and block if we were going to attempt to create a true device that > protects kids. > > > > How would you even know the content if everything is going HTTPS? You > won't see anything but a stream of crypto and you can't really content > filter that. Only the DNS name could give it away as porn vs. online > banking. > > ~Seth > > > -- >
