The response predicted was the response received, I now know I'm not off my
rocker at least.

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 10:05 AM, John Strand <[email protected]> wrote:

> lol
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Mike Patterson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> HOW IS SEKURE NETWORK FORMD
>>
>> >:\
>>
>> On 2011/07/05 10:31 AM, John Strand wrote:
>> > Mike,
>> >
>> > Are you new here?
>> >
>> > I kid, I kid.
>> >
>> > John
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Mike Patterson <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 2011/07/05 9:08 AM, Ron Gula wrote:
>> >>> On 7/2/2011 11:41 AM, Michael Lubinski wrote:
>> >>>> Read:
>> >>>>
>> >>
>> http://blog.zeltser.com/post/6479619232/protean-information-security-architecture
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Knowing this list has a significant amount of pen testers and such,
>> what
>> >>>> say you?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> I really like the emotion behind this concept, but don't like this for
>> >>> practical reasons.
>> >> [..]
>> >>> I don't mind at all having fake targets on the inside of your network,
>> >>> but the idea of constantly reconfiguring the data structures and
>> servers
>> >>> as a method to thwart pen testers is no substitute for patching, tight
>> >>> inbound/outbound ACLs, network monitoring and log analysis.
>> >>
>> >> My first thought was "it must be nice to have the kind of free time
>> >> after doing. . ." everything you say, and more, including convincing
>> >> sysadmins that yes, the firewall really is there to help you and yes,
>> >> you really do need to figure out precisely how that workstation got
>> >> popped and writing documentation and helping others to do the same and
>> >> responding (or actively ignoring) RIAA/MPAA complaints and figuring out
>> >> if the lack of IDS logs is because of a NIC failure, driver bug, OS
>> bug,
>> >> disk failure, something else, going to meetings with your co-workers or
>> >> management... all the other stuff blue-team IT types do on a daily
>> >> basis. Or would, if they had 48 hour days.
>> >>
>> >> And THEN, when you DO have that kind of time, you get to spend MORE
>> time
>> >> ensuring that your new honeypots don't actually become a vulnerability
>> >> themselves. While you convince management that they're necessary, and
>> >> try to assuage the fears of NOC monkeys, and...
>> >>
>> >> OK, yeah, confusing the attacker's well and good, but unless you've got
>> >> all the other ducks in a row, you might be finding the root of all evil
>> >> - premature optimisation. Lenny's idea is nice in theory, but in
>> >> practise, I think it belongs near the bottom of the priority list.
>> >>
>> >> Mike
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Pauldotcom mailing list
>> >> [email protected]
>> >> http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
>> >> Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Pauldotcom mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
>> > Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pauldotcom mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
>> Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> John Strand
> Office: (605) 550-0742
> Cell: (303) 710-1171
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pauldotcom mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
> Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
>
_______________________________________________
Pauldotcom mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com

Reply via email to