Text 12598, 87 rader
Skriven 2010-11-26 01:06:44 av Peter Knapper (3:772/1.0)
  Kommentar till text 12575 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Firewalls
=================
Hi Michiel,

 PK> The "issue" that I have with this, is that - - One usually places a
 PK> lock on the door that allows ENTRY to a room, 
 PK> not on the room itself.
 PK> If the door is locked, then one needs to worry less about the room
 PK> itself.

 MvdV> Analogies often fail. Nothing wrong with placing a 
 MvdV> lock on a car if the car itself is what one wants to 
 MvdV> protect.

Once the room (Windows???) has been broken into, then all bets are off, however
with an EXTERNAL F/W (from reputable company), one has an "extra" layer that
can offer better protection (IMHO). 


 PK>  The term "Firewall", originally came from the wall between the
 PK> Passenger bay and the Engine compartment of a Car,

 MvdV> It is my understanding that it is older than that and 
 MvdV> comes from the entertainment industry. The firewall 
 MvdV> is a lowerable barrier in a theater that separates 
 MvdV> the audience from the stage.

Somehow I dont consider a Fire curtain from the entertainment industry as quite
as comparable as a true motor Vehicle Firewall (IMHO). There is a similarity
but the implementation is not quite the same...

 PK> Why place that "firewall" in the users lap, and 
 PK> not (as the car did) between the 2 compartments.

 MvdV> It does not matter where the firewall is, as long as 
 MvdV> it is between the user and the fire.

I dis-agree, it is pointless placing the Firewall in the passengers Lap, it
really needs to be external to the passenger (IMHO)...


 PK> If the Firewall is on the Target, then once that 
 PK> Firewall is Broken,
 PK> the Client is Broken,

 MvdV> If the firewall is broken, then it is broken, no matter where it is.

Which comes back to the Multi layer approach of using a separate Firewall
device...

 PK>  - To effectively use a Firewall, the USER needs 
 PK> to know as much about
 PK> that Firewall as possible. Now I don't use Windows myself, however
 PK> what limited work I have done with Windows, 
 PK> shows me that there is so
 PK> much "Secret Squirrel" work going on by MS, that 
 PK> I simply do NOT trust MS to get it right all the time.

 MvdV> Ah, there it is. So it is not that a firewall comes 
 MvdV> with the OS that is your problem, you do not trust 
 MvdV> Microsoft  to get it right, that is your problem.

I dont consider it a "problem" at all, its simply a situation that I prefer to
not leave in the Laps of the gods (EG MS), but prefer to manage myself.

 MvdV> Well... you may have a point. Microsoft certainly has 
 MvdV> been very sloppy regarding security in the past. But 
 MvdV> i am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt 
 MvdV> and I think they may have learned from their mistakes.

Sorry, thats a risk I prefer to not take...

 PK> FWIW, I do not enable any "local" Firewalls, ALL my Firewalls are
 PK> independant from the devices they protect.

 MvdV> That is your choice, but do you have any specific 
 MvdV> knowledge about holes in Microsoft's internal 
 MvdV> firewall or is it just general distrust that keeps 
 MvdV> you from using it?

I admit to avoiding using MS products wherever possible, that is why I have no
Windows S/W on any of my Home machines......;-) Based on that I would say the
later statement above is probably the more correct, I find it near impossble to
trust MS.......;-(

Cheers...........pk.

--- Maximus/2 3.01
 * Origin: === Maxie BBS.  Ak, NZ +64 9 444-0989 === (3:772/1)