I was watching this post .. with a lot of curiosity.
I just have to agree that ..
1) I wont want to spend a lot of time securing the OS of the firewall
2) look after the other aspects that are needed to make the firewall secure ...
like AV and all ..
As such, ISA will never be on the top of my list for a first tier firewall. 2nd
tier, yes, if the customer agrees .. and is willing to get their team trained
.. accordingly with the integration into their LAN.
Naren
T. Naren - Dip M, CCDA,
Certified Engineer - Watchguard and Borderware
Certified Sales Expert - Watchguard
Technical Manager - Pactech (http://www.pactech.net)
Blk 211, Henderson Road, Singapore 159552,
Tel: +65-62711123, Fax: +65-62703919
Emaill: naren@pactech.net Mobile: +65-90044249
----- Original Message -----
From: Casey DeBerry
Cc: firewalls@securityfocus.com
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 10:02 AM
Subject: RE: ISA 2004 - professional opinion
I would agree with Paul-
While I will not say that ISA is not secure, I would say that other
options are more secure.. ISA has it's advantages, including a great
way to secure MS OWA services, as well as a good web proxy. IMHO I
would not put this out on our permiter, but would consider using it
behind another firewall for defense in depth.
Are you looking for a traditional packet filtering firewall? Or an
application proxy? These operate at different levels of the OSI stack,
so it would help if you could provide a little more information.
This mail has been secured by the MXTreme Mail Firewall, which offers
the most proven e-mail security solutions. For a free trial or
evaluation, please contact sales.sg@pactech.net http://www.pactech.net
