[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
misunderstanding scale
- Subject: misunderstanding scale
- From: tmorizot at gmail.com (Timothy Morizot)
- Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 13:50:49 -0500
- In-reply-to: <CAP-guGUsuVw6HopiD-tff70u41gB=VKUx7NTvHW09a7TiiU08g@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CAP-guGVfNySCSuw-59kuGWe=eJxKTqo5bySttDaftQa7vA6V0g@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <CAP-guGUsuVw6HopiD-tff70u41gB=VKUx7NTvHW09a7TiiU08g@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 12:37 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> What sort of traction are you getting from that argument when you
> speak with enterprise security folks?
>
Actually, I never even had to make the argument in our enterprise. Our
cybersecurity organization already knew that overall NAT reduced rather
than enhanced network security and had a deeper real understanding of
security defense in depth than I did. I never had to convince anyone that
NAT wasn't a security feature. It sounds like we have so many enterprises
that do security poorly because many don't even understand the basics.
Scott