Re: [OT]Proxy Software with multiple dialup numbers

[Calum Morrell <calum@xxxxxxx>]

"K. C. Li" wrote:
> BT use Tivoli as part of their automatic software delivery to
individual
> PCs. I agree the process does work but it is not universally loved by
> everyone. As Ian has pointed out, I wouldn't want to be at the
receiving
> end of the ensuing telephone calls when the automatic process has
failed
> and everyone in the company is demanding action to sort his or her PC
out.



I think there are very few, if any, processes loved by everyone :-(
The phone call scenario is precisely why I left tech support many years
ago. On saying that, my problem was with the lack of foresight and
backup provided by the IT decision makers. While there is always the
possibility of a problem, nothing should be set-up that has not been
thoroughly tested in a dedicated environment as close to the original as
possible. This makes it far easier to avoid the entire company phoning
the helpdesk at once.


> It is a compromise. However, I know that AV software, strategically
placed
> in the distribution route, can significantly minimise the side effect
of
> any particular virus. Take the recent "ILOVEYOU" virus, in
one company
> alone, many ten of thousands of infected e-mails were intercepted by
> server SV software before their distribution. Even disregarding the
> primary effect of the virus, the sudden influx and replication of many
> thousands of infected e-mails would significantly degrade or overload
the
> e-mail system.


Yeah, but that was my point. A gateway is only a strategic point for
systems where no machine has access to either floppy, cd-rom or other
removable media. These are also a point of entry and having only gateway
based AV protection does nothing for a system once a virus has entered
the network. I may have misunderstood you but the point on the
'ILOVEYOU' virus suggests to me that you think I only want AVP on
desktop. That's not the case at all I simply don't believe that only
having it on a firewall/gateway/router etc. is a secure solution for
today's environments. Compromise, while rarely avoidable to some extent,
is very dangerous. Through testing you can almost eliminate all the
concerns you have expressed about localized AVP updating whether user
managed or automatic, and through proactive education to clients,
managers and end users you have the potential to improve the situation
over time.



> Sometimes I can't help but think that SV software companies actually
> "commission" the development of some viruses. As we know,
virus
> development is not particularly complex or difficult. Virus
"toolkits" are
> widely available on the Internet. A few hundred Pound's worth of
spending
> could bring in millions for AV companies and, since they would know
the
> virus coding, they could claim to be the first to offer protection or
> immunity from the microbe.


Yeah, heard this from a few people [some of which worked for DR. Solomon
[that's not right is it?]]. ooh nested brackets! I though I'd left that
behind with the programming :-@


Calum
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/2065/_/975865122/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


begin:vcard
n:Morrell;Calum
tel;cell:+44 (0)709 214 1538
tel;fax:+44 (0)870 131 5408
tel;home:+44 (0)709 214 1538
tel;work:+44 (0)709 214 1538
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
adr:;;;;;;
version:2.1
email;internet:calum@xxxxxxx
fn:Calum Morrell
end:vcard