Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!b-tech!zeeff
From: zeeff@b-tech.ann-arbor.mi.us (Jon Zeeff)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: A SUSPICIOUS SECURE GATEWAY
Message-ID: <46F%_++@b-tech.uucp>
Date: 26 May 90 18:59:41 GMT
References: <435@jove.dec.com> <9005231723.AA20278@hp-ses.sde.hp.com> <13020@ulysses.att.com>
Organization: Branch Technology
Lines: 18

>not secure enough today.  Blame complacent vendors, blame lazy
>administrators, blame careless users -- it doesn't matter much,
>since the empirical fact remains:  a very significant fraction

While it may not matter when deciding to use a "secure" gateway, the cause
matters very much when you go to fix the problems (which I hope you are
still doing).

It doesn't inspire confidence  - even AT&T can't make a Unix they trust.

>Incidentally, I say ``mostly'' because there's an important class of
>device -- dial-out modems -- that is not capable of security today, and
>is not likely to be in the forseeable future.  Finding a dialer pool on

There are these $100 toll restrictors (a little box) that help quite a bit.

-- 
Jon Zeeff (NIC handle JZ)	 zeeff@b-tech.ann-arbor.mi.us