From: "Geo" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_00FA_01C5CCB5.512F7A20
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Not entirely true, if the feature is available to any software I load on =
the machine then it's up to the programmer as well. If both Intel and MS =
had built in user controls so that we could turn on the capabilities for =
whatever programs we wanted to allow to access these security features =
then I might agree with your "it's up to you" statement.

I don't like control of my machine being taken away from me.

Geo.
  "Rich"  wrote in message news:4347640f{at}w3.nls.net...
     Check whatever you want.  It's up to you.

  Rich

    "Geo"  wrote in message
news:43470b84{at}w3.nls.net...
    enabled and up to date antivirus means nothing. I can't count the =
number of Norton protected machines that are trojaned that I see on a = daily basis.

    Geo.
      "Rich"  wrote in message news:43455f13$1{at}w3.nls.net...
         First, DRM is irrelevant here and unless you are trying to =
spread FUD I don't see why you would mention it.

         As for the rest, you should be going back in time.  See =
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/prodtech/windowsserver2003/quar=
antineservices/default.mspx.  You can perform whatever validation you =
want on the client.  Typical checks would be to verify that client =
security policy is met such as enabled and up to date antivirus and =
firewall.

         In Longhorn this gets extended to the LAN.  See =
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/technologies/networking/nap/de=
fault.mspx.

         I believe Cisco also has products in this space.

      Rich


        "John Beckett"
 wrote in =
message news:fpq9k19od4ntbh0flgobh19p4kclbgqetn{at}4ax.com...
        "Geo"  wrote in message =
news::
        > I guess I'm stupid but I only use VPN's to link secure =
networks together,
        > using one to allow an insecure computer total access to a =
secure network
        > seems like a security accident just waiting to happen.. =
Insecure machines
        > like wandering laptops belong on their own network firewalled =
from the
        > secure network with only limited access.

        We live in interesting times...

        Fast-forwarding to the future by, say, two years:
        The only half-way decent procedure to allow a roaming laptop to =
have
        remote access to your network is to require that the laptop be =
running a
        DRM-protected system, including hardware, BIOS and OS. That way, =
you will
        know that only trusted software is running on the machine.

        Anything less than the Microsoft/Intel/et-al DRM initiative =
means you just
        won't be able to allow roaming machines to connect to the core =
office
        network.

        John

------=_NextPart_000_00FA_01C5CCB5.512F7A20
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








Not entirely true, if the feature is =
available to=20
any software I load on the machine then it's up to the programmer as = well. If=20
both Intel and MS had built in user controls so that we could turn on = the=20
capabilities for whatever programs we wanted to allow to access these = security=20
features then I might agree with your "it's up to you" =
statement.
 
I don't like control of my machine =
being taken away=20
from me.
 
Geo.

  "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:4347640f{at}w3.nls.net...
     Check
whatever you =
want.  It's=20
  up to you.
   
  Rich
   
  

    "Geo" <georger{at}nls.net>=20">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>=20
    wrote in message news:43470b84{at}w3.nls.net...
    enabled and up to date antivirus =
means nothing.=20
    I can't count the number of Norton protected machines that are =
trojaned that=20
    I see on a daily basis.
     
    Geo.
    

      "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:43455f13$1{at}w3.nls.net...
        
First, DRM is =
irrelevant here=20
      and unless you are trying to spread FUD I don't see why you would =
mention=20
      it.
       
         As
for the rest, you =
should be=20
      going back in time.  See http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/prodtech/windowsserver2=
003/quarantineservices/default.mspx">http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sec=
urity/prodtech/windowsserver2003/quarantineservices/default.mspx.&nbs=
p;=20
      You can perform whatever validation you want on the client.  =
Typical=20
      checks would be to verify that client security policy is met such =
as=20
      enabled and up to date antivirus and firewall.
       
         In
Longhorn this =
gets extended=20
      to the LAN.  See http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/technologies/networkin=
g/nap/default.mspx">http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/technologi=
es/networking/nap/default.mspx.
       
         I
believe Cisco also =
has=20
      products in this space.
       
      Rich
       
       
      
        "John Beckett" <FirstnameSurname{at}com=">mailto:FirstnameSurname{at}compuserve.com.omit">FirstnameSurname{at}com=
puserve.com.omit>=20
        wrote in message news:fpq9k19od4n=
tbh0flgobh19p4kclbgqetn{at}4ax.com..."Geo"=20
        <georger{at}nls.net>">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>
=
wrote in=20
        message  * Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)

SEEN-BY: 633/267 270 5030/786

@PATH: 379/45 1 106/2000 633/267