On Oct 21, 2011 7:37 PM, "Cameron Byrne" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> On Oct 21, 2011 6:52 PM, "Curtis Villamizar" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > In message <CAD6AjGQCbRkqE4tg3P=+
[email protected]>
> > Cameron Byrne writes:
> >
> > > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Curtis Villamizar <[email protected]>
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In message <CAD6AjGRqy4yjHpWnY+qEiyuJ8egvNtH=5stj=
[email protected]>
> > > > Cameron Byrne writes:
> > > >
> > > >> I am in the camp the host should be strong and smart and networks
> > > >> should be simple and fast.
> > > >>
> > > >> Cb
> > > >
> > > > Same here but we can't get rid of all the windows systems out there.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Why?  Even windows XP comes with a host based firewall since 2003 ...
> > > That's coming up on 10 years by the time homenet influences the
> > > market.
> > >
> > > <sarcasm>
> > >
> > > . blah blah blah... we all must engineer for the least common
> > > denominator because somebody out there can be attacked by the Morris
> > > Worm still...
> > >
> > > </sarcasm>
> > >
> > >
> > > And, most (cite?) actual attacks are not preventable with a $30 home
> > > router.  Most (cite?) homenet security issues are relate to phishing
> > > and users downloading and installing malware with admin privilege,
> > > which PCP and stateful firewalls cannot solve.
> > >
> > >
> > > > So service providers are compelled to put firewalls in front of
> > > > consumer customers (and even most small business) and have them
> > > > enabled by default.
> > > >
> > > > To not do so would result in the service provider having a network
of
> > > > malicious bots (as opposed to a network containing a subset of sites
> > > > running malware that the service provider couldn't prevent).
> > > >
> > >
> > > Is there proof that $30 home routers protect computers and "move the
> > > needle" on malware?  Or is this left over mindset from  the 1990s?
> > >
> > >
> > > > Back in the early 1990s I argued that we should not let windows
> > > > systems on the Internet.  That was back when your network (college
> > > > campuses, corporations, etc) could be shut down by a provider if
> > > > attacks were coming out of it and you did nothing to completely
> > > > eradicate it.  An example of this was Mitnik breaking into a
> > > > university in Houston and Sesquinet shutting off their Internet for
> > > > four days due to a computer science department response that
security
> > > > was a hard problem and from a practical standpoint there was nothing
> > > > they could do about it.  Back then, if you couldn't make it secure,
it
> > > > didn't belong on the Internet.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Would a firewall stopped this or was this social engineering?  Also,
> > > this is not the 1990s... Things are indeed better now from a network
> > > programming perspective. Social engineering and so on are a different
> > > layer.
> > >
> > > > I do see your point and agree with you.  From a technical
perspective,
> > > > firewalls are an inadequate bandaid over a set of OS and application
> > > > security problems and the right thing to do is fix the root casue.
> > > >
> > > ^^^^
> > > Good stuff there.  Lets focus on that instead of the dogma and FUD to
> > > create "homenet" of the future.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Cameron
> > >
> > > > Curtis
> >
> >
> > Cameron,
> >
> > I was arguing against firewalls as a security solution.  You seemed to
> > have missed the whole point of the email.  Pleae reread it.
> >
>
> Got it, no firewalls, you are against them.
>
> > At most you could say that I conceded that firewalls are a marginal
> > improvement (and therefore won't go away).  For the provider it may be
> > whether 90% of their users end up running malware or 10% (cite?).
> > When there is a new remote exploit discovered it limits the damage.
>
> Got it, you think firewalls are required because gradma is running BIND 8.
>
> But, my point is that sp3 windows xp has a default on firewalls. So,
assume 10yo software, what exploits are we preventing? How often do they
occur?
>
> I am just looking for specific data so we can make a data supported
decision.
>
> Cb

http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10

Accoding to this data, 0.16% are running win2k, which afaik does not have a
standard OS based default firewall and is the last Windows OS to not have a
standard host based firewall that prevents remote attacks.

Are we really engineering and setting security policy for less than1%?  Keep
in mind this 1% is getting even smaller.

Cb
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to