[3180] in WWW Security List Archive
RE: [NTSEC] Re: General Question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dev Kumar Roy)
Thu Oct 10 03:21:20 1996
From: Dev Kumar Roy <devroy@pluto.xko.dec.com>
To: "'Roberto Galoppini'" <rgaloppini@tim.it>,
"'Paul D. Robertson'"
<proberts@clark.net>
Cc: "'Mike Earnshaw'" <bigvern@ozemail.com.au>,
"'www-security@ns2.Rutgers.EDU'" <www-security@ns2.rutgers.edu>,
"'ntsecurity@iss.net'" <ntsecurity@iss.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 10:31:15 +0530
Errors-To: owner-www-security@ns2.rutgers.edu
Hi,
Well I would like to say that altavista has come out with the only true
firewall(whatever that means)on NT,maybe you should have a look at it as
we know that Digital's Firewalls are legendary.
Cheers
Dev
>----------
>From: Paul D. Robertson[SMTP:proberts@clark.net]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 1996 7:39 AM
>To: Roberto Galoppini
>Cc: Mike Earnshaw; www-security@ns2.Rutgers.EDU; ntsecurity@iss.net
>Subject: Re: [NTSEC] Re: General Question
>
>On Tue, 8 Oct 1996, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>
>> Mike Earnshaw wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>> > 2. I have been tasked with setting up our companies Intranet/Internet
>> > connection, whilst I am fairly confident with Windows NT, I know very
>> > little about WWW Security. Bearing in mind point one above, what
>> > considerations should I bear in mind when connecting our Intranet to the
>> > Internet with NT v4.0 ( is v3.51 better ?) and Catapult.
>
>Catapult isn't meant to be a firewall, and at this point, being still
>beta
>code, shouldn't be used as such. If you don't know anything about
>firewalls, I'd suggest a lot of research, or a couple of classes prior
>to
>starting.
>
>>
>> Mhh.. NT v4.0 is that MICROSOFT product that allows UP TO TEN
>> connections, isn't it? Why don't you have a look at the "MS NT
>> Workstation 4.0 License Maintains Socket Limitation" by Tim O'Reilly
>> (http://software.ora.com/news/msnt40_limit.html).
>
>NT Server doesn't have that limitation.
>
>>
>> > 3. Regrettfully due to some clause somewhere, we have to primarily use MS
>> > products, but if anyone can help with points of view for or against,
>>and if
>> > against some alternatives, to NT & Catapult - it would greatly improve my
>> > chances of swaying the MD !!.
>
>Catapult isn't a firewall, and is still beta code, I'd not risk my
>company
>on it. There are also lots of complaints about it interacting with
>Netscape browsers in the public MS newsgroups. If you *have* to go NT
>(I'd also not use it for a firewall, because it's not mature enough for
>my
>tastes -- Yes, my firewall runs an *old* release of its OS -- also I've
>seen enough complaints about unpredictable, or wrong behaviour on
>multi-homed NT hosts to make me very wary of something like Catapult
>which doesn't live under the OS in the network stack) you'd be better
>off
>with something like Firewall-1, or Raptor. Be sure to choose a good
>reseller who can help you with configuration issues.
>
>Paul
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-----
>Paul D. Robertson "My statements in this message are personal
>opinions
>proberts@clark.net which may have no basis whatsoever in fact."
>
>PSB#9280
>
>
