« All I Need to Know About Security I Learned From Will Smith | Main | You Can Run, But You Can't Hide From Patches »

Comments

Stuart Berman

Seems like your being hard on the Jericho Forum folks.

It is not just about laptops cruising in and out of the perimeter... We have VPNs with remote PCs on unknown networks, site to site VPNs with networks of questionable perimeter security (connected to who and how knows what), SSL VPNs that are really tunneling network traffic, web services that run a variety of protocols including method bearing payloads, other RPC connections (OWA and Sharepoint), unsanctioned remote access by heavily advertised products like GoToMyPC, Instant Messaging that can also do other neat tricks like desktop sharing, WebEx for sanctioned desktop sharing, certainly most spyware is stupid and pathetic and easily stopped from phoning home - but what about something that is clever enough to honor any IE proxies and tunnel in HTTPS, and SSH is handy for some very cool tricks.

Seems to me like the economics of deperimeterization has already laid the issue to rest.

Sec Nerd

All those issues are being dealt with already and have been for several years. Scan and block was an early method, used by Sygate and Zone Labs and InfoExpress. Whole Security took it a few steps further, then Cisco came out with Cisco Network Admissions Control and Microsoft with Microsoft Network Access Protection.

In the wireless LAN world, the 802.1x standard advanced, with the underpinnings of how to do standard security checking upon connection to the network.

Then the Trusted Computing Group formed the Trusted Network Connect group and they have put together some draft standards to be the open standards counterpart to Cisco's proprietary CNAC and Microsoft's proprietary MNAP. Then, last October MSFT and Cisco said they were working together to rationalize their two proprietary approaches onto a standard approach - we'll see about that one.

But the bottom line is that this has all been going on before and during when the Jericho Forum was talking about "de-permiterisation". So, I may be being too harsh on their goals, but the term is silly. All the efforts I discussed above aren't saying "no more perimiter, lets depend on the endpoints to do their own security" - they are saying "what standard mechanisms can we use to judge the security of an endpoint to determine what, if any, access we give it to our network." Not so cute a title, but much more effective in the real world.

Stiennon

"Added bonus" was one of my father's favorite tautologies. At least you did not say "Extra added bonus". :-)

The comments to this entry are closed.