helo,
> Actually according to some organizations, it is nice to have doc on-line,
> but when installing and IDS or Firewall, it kinds of defeats the purpose of
> rule #1 when installing security software, ensure that the device/host it
> will be installed is not connected to the Internet. Oops, kind of bites
> trying to read the HTML on the big I when the cable isn't connected.
i would agree that a CD is handy .. many co never considered IDS (still don't)
as they have been connected for some time using open source tools to do
IDS on their FW. i see that quite a bit. so it depends on their thought pattern
do we build our own|| assemble from tools that we are comfortable with on the
Internet or buy from a sw sales guy? is see both sides of the wire here;-))
3.
> dot coms are fine, real as in top notch security consulting service
> companies don't chuckle when they go onsite, and they you have what, oh
-ok so we have a tie here as there are charlatans and there are the real mccoy
as in all places. i believe that security is a state of mind. i also believe it
to be a moving target.. and a case of more or less security..
> BTW, a IT Director cannot be fired if they choose Cisco over some new to
> the market IDS system.. So just be aware of that, even though Cisco IDS is
> in desperate need of updating..
Agreed but i would rather invest in mindshare than brands names as well
you need fluidity as i sed previously.
> >4. It is produced by a real company that is self-funded or VC funded
> >and > one
> >has a real mailing address not some Mailboxes US address somewhere >
> >(although
> >those are fun to have if you hiding out from the law or > something, but that
> >is another post or story to post) >
> >ok so they have to be bought off is that it by selling out to the highest
> >bidder? VC can be good or can be really bad IMHO. hmmm... oh i see well
> >IMHO there are a lot of co that decide to go it on their own.. its called
> >independent..
>
> Yes, independent only goes so far, very hard to scale if all of a sudden
> one gets 2000 orders for your IDS system that is barely through QA.. :)
hmmm.. there is where planning goes and IMHO i think this is no different
than the Bob Young story or for that matter any co spawned on the I.
(a co does what it needs to do..)
6. Security consultants can moan/whine/bitch about it to the
like it or not feedback is constructive mostly anyhow;-))
> > > 7. Your IDS product actually gains enough sales/revenue to be on some
> Again, I am speaking about IDS products, this market is a totally different
> animal than most. I would agree that a majority of the Internet traffic
> goes through a half dozen or so research projects that just become standard
> de facto (i.e. sendmail, DNS, BIND, etc)
well i am most likely very biased towards defacto standards so .. i will try to
comment objectively.. IDS is not that diff a animal from my past
albeit scant participation in IDS stdout .. work is in progress there to
formulate a OPSEC standard for lack of a better acronym..
> > > 8. Other vendors
no kidding,,
> > > 9. Companies have to either issue hopefully :) a large PO or check to get
> > > into their security administrators grubby little hands.
> Yes, this is a definite + sign inthe world of IDS. Revenue counts, Good
> Tech support counts, enhancements greatly help,
well i would agree and co like NFR whose CTO has spent quite a bit
of time dev the product should get what they deserve IMHO. obviously MJR
agrees with you as well since i heard about the $$ infusion to grow i
percieve anyhow. Actually IMHO (Service + Support) are king..
Marketing a product well is very important.. you have my agreement there.
Co IMHO have the right to sell whatever they want for whatever price the
market will bare. so does open source have the right to offer their products
to b openly leverages by one and all thru a service/support co or directly
if they so see fit. each co as well as individual has their opinion here.
Best Regards,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
