Re: iso 17799

[Rachel Rosencrantz <rachelr () att com>]

> From my understanding ISO 17799 receives a lot of focus in Europe,
especially with government agencies, especially in the UK where it started
as BS7799.  For whatever reason it has not received as much attention over
in the USA.  Perhaps it is the IETF/ISO Open/Closed divide.

When I first heard of ISO 17799 you needed to pay to see what was in it.  I
suspect this probably reduced people's familiarity with it, and reduced how
much anyone would talk about it.  I have seen more mention of ISO 17799 as
of late so it may become more popular/more part of the common knowledge.
Thus far I haven't actually been able to read it, just vague documents about
it or tips on compliance that were filled with vapid statements.

It appears that earlier versions were not flexible enough, and I still don't
see much publicly available information on it beyond the "it is a
comprehensive set of controls....".  It makes it a bit hard to evaluate and
decide if it is any better than say, any of these RFC references:
http://www.more.net/security/best/other.html

-Rachel


On 7/13/04 8:48 AM, "avraham shir-el (arthur sherman)" <avraham () jct ac il>
wrote:

> i hope i'm not opening a pandora's box here, but-
>
> i'm following this list for ~ a year now and haven't seen any mention of
> iso 17799.
> it's defined on their website as
> "a comprehensive set of controls comprising best
> practices in IS"
>
> i've seen lots on this list about best practices w/o
> any refrences to 17799.
>
> any opinions on it?
> or does the extremely noticable lack of attention
> say it all?
> tnx
> ams
> _______________________________________________
> firewall-wizards mailing list
> firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
> http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards

_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards