> Security: 350 > Ease of use/installation: 300 (almost as high as security!) > Features: 250 > Performance: 100 > > The score for security is about 1/3 of the total score. I submit that > someone hasn't thought through the function of a firewall. I agree that security shouldn't be "weighted" in a mix with unrelated factors. But I do think that completeness of security is a legitimate factor in the buying decision, since the project being protected may have a limited budget -- and a manageable downside in case of sustained attack. I also think that ease of use is important, because a difficult interface increases the likelihood that important components in a theoretically high security rating will be misconfigured or go unused, thus lowering the overall security of the system. Performance should, if anything, be weighted higher, because an otherwise secure firewall that underperforms is vulnerable to denial-of-service attacks. - [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
