Thank you sir. You obviously have a much bigger user population than we do.
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 17:17, Free, Bob <[email protected]> wrote: > Akonix. > > I don't know much about it, it was selected by the InfoSec folks to meet > audit requirements, there are several (4 I think) of them in some kind of HA > load balanced configuration. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 4:41 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: IM raises its ugly head again... > > That's pretty sweet. Care to name the appliance? > > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 15:57, Free, Bob <[email protected]> wrote: >> We support only the most basic IM services from the 3 major players' thick >> clients, web services or 3rd party clients won't work. IM traffic all goes >> through an appliance and is 100% logged, reviewed, archived etc. The >> solution ties to AD account of the logged in user same as the web proxy. >> Works in conjunction with the web proxy to deny any rouge P2P apps etc >> >> Nothing like video, music streaming, file xfer is allowed, just basic IM >> text service. It has a workflow for reviewing and auditing instant messaging >> conversations and demonstrating compliance to regulatory agencies. >> >> One cool thing is that it keeps all internal communications inside our >> network even if it is between different external providers. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 12:44 PM >> To: NT System Admin Issues >> Subject: IM raises its ugly head again... >> >> Anyone out there care to share their policy and (very) general >> implementation info on IM and personal video conferencing usage? >> >> Does your company, for instance, allow users to install and use any of >> the major consumer IM/video apps and communicate directly to the major >> public IM/video providers such as MSN, AOL, Yahoo! and Google? >> >> If your company does allow it, what does the company consider to be >> the cost/benefit tradeoff WRT security and not using a centralized >> IM/video server with gateways to public IM/video services? >> >> Also, what security concerns were looked at before implementation and >> what measures, if any, were taken to mitigate them? >> >> If direct access to public IM/video services isn't allowed, is an >> IM/video service provided for business purposes, and if so, what are >> you using - MSFT OCS, or Openfire, or something else? >> >> If you can't comment on-list, but don't mind doing so off-list, I'd >> certainly appreciate it. >> >> Kurt >> >> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ >> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ >> >> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ >> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
