/* HINT: Search archives @ http://www.indyramp.com/masq/ before posting!
/* ALSO: Don't quote this header. It makes you look lame :-) */
Shawn Campbell wrote:
> I am a computer technician on staff at a small college in Ohio. We
> recently purchased some Cisco equipment 35xx & 400x switches and a
> support contract from a local company. The company's cisco/network
> guru was talking to us about the cisco pix firewalls and all of the
> benefits. He knew we were using linux and WinNT at the moment and told
> us the Cisco pix was superior and that Operating System based firewalls
> (WinNT and Linux) are actually vulnerable to certain types of attacks.
> Let me be more specific. He said that under certain conditions within
> the operating system (other tasks it is performing) that the firewall
> rules will be "ignored" in favor of the other tasks and will let harmful
> packets get in. He said that certain checks get "skipped" under certain
> circumstances. He also said that the Cisco PIX was nearly undetectable
> and only surpassed by Firewall1 (another firewall product). He rattled
> off something about a testing service that cost $13000 and how it was
> verified by cisco and everything.
cisco would say that :) did anyone outside cisco verify it :)
raf
_______________________________________________
Masq maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Admin requests can be handled at http://www.indyramp.com/masq-list/ --
THIS INCLUDES UNSUBSCRIBING!
or email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PLEASE read the HOWTO and search the archives before posting.
You can start your search at http://www.indyramp.com/masq/
Please keep general linux/unix/pc/internet questions off the list.
