On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Eugeniu Patrascu <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Herro91 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Has anyone on the lists explored Cisco's ScanSafe SaaS offering, now > called > > Cisco Cloud Web Security - as a means of providing protection in the > cloud > > that would potentially negate the requirement to have a full tunnel (i.e. > > allow split tunneling) for teleworkers? > > > > First of all, why are you allowing or disallowing split tunnel networks ? > > The only case I see when you want to route all traffic through the gateway > is when you have a big network that changes constantly and you don't want > to update ACLs all day to make sure a teleworker can reach certain > equipment no matter what. > Hi, one argument against split tunneling is the possibility that the attacker would install somehow a proxy on the laptop of the victim. This would expose the corporate network to the attacker via the victim's laptop, while the victim is connected to the corporate net. On the other hand, split tunneling is something that is enforced on the client... Regards, John _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
