Kurt,
You forgot to put CENTRALLY MANAGED in Caps.  Without that, what's the point
in any org larger than a handful of machines?  You get the nice checkbox,
then get to watch as the actual management structure falls apart.


On 1/16/08 12:01, "Kurt Buff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I'd be for it, definitely, IFF (that is, if and only if) they can be
> centrally managed, the workstations can support the load, they are set
> up with a default deny policy, which means that by default everything
> is denied, and you only open up what is needed for people to do their
> business-related functions.
> 
> Absent those conditions, they are pretty worthless, or will be more
> pain than gain.
> 
> Kurt
> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 16, 2008 4:59 AM, René de Haas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Asking for opinions. Was informed that we are going to put firewalls on
>> desktop pc's as well, though there is a firewall at the perimeter of the
>> network.
>> 
>> One motivation was that with a pentest from the inside we would be more
>> secure.
>> 
>> Are you doing this as well? Arguments for/against.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> René
> 
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!    ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

-- 
Salvador Manzo  [ 620 W. 35th St - Los Angeles, CA 90089  e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Auxiliary Services IT, Datacenter
University of Southern California
818-612-5112
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom is courage".
Pericles' Funeral Oration (431 BC)


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!    ~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

Reply via email to