On 21.10.2005, at 18:56, Morten Nilsen wrote:
>

> please read
> http://www.ranum.com/security/computer_security/editorials/dumb/
>
> it's much better to block everything, and then allow the things you  
> know
> is ok

ok, I've read it, but sorry, you miss my point.

my point was and is that I don't see the advantage of having  
dansguardian when I don't have to filter network access for a bunch  
of minors.

and I disagree with the "block everything" approach. That's the  
reason I can't work in my university. My university seems to be the  
only one where incoming video streams are blocked, b/c the system  
administrators do not work in the media department. That's why you  
have to make an IPsec connection from inside WLAN to a gateway host b/ 
c they don't know about other ways.

In a modern world of networks the networks aren't bad. (I insist).  
The problems arise from the application level. so blocks have to be  
applied on the application level, b/c it would only take months (if  
not around already) for worms to pass through port 80 or even make  
their own ssl connection through internet exploder(!).
Don't miss understand me, I can see your concerns, but what is harder  
to follow, all new network applications, and what kind of connections  
you need to stay in business, or to do what we focus on: make secure  
services and bring them out there first?

I on my part construct services secure first and apply firewalls  
where needed, not the other way, close the building down, then open  
what is needed, that's so not what we apply socially. Networks still  
follow society, not the other way round, popular things as instant  
messaging, internet telephony, etc, would have never started off as  
they did if the inventors would have to apply for IANA port first,  
then tell the users they need it, and they talk to their  
administrators for allowance. We do not govern users, we serve them.

to make business from the plan first is the one idea that didn't turn  
out well.

so no offense, back to the start, I see dansguardian not as much as a  
security then a social software, and if I'm wrong feel free to prove  
me wrong, but don't start explaining that question with different  
security planning.

matthias




_______________________________________________
tsl-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.trustix.org/mailman/listinfo/tsl-discuss

Reply via email to