Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
Re: Proxy 2.0 secure? (AG vs. SPF)
From: tqbf () pobox com
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 14:03:11 -0500 (CDT)
no pass. Products like FW-1 and PIX do both. Are they SPFs or not?
They are not SPFs. They may use SPFs, but they, like all firewalls, employ a variety of different access control mechanisms. My assertion is that the aspects of FW-1 that rely on stateful filtering are less secure than the aspects which rely on proxying. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thomas H. Ptacek SNI Labs, Network Associates, Inc. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.pobox.com/~tqbf "If you're so special, why aren't you dead?"
Current thread:
- Re: Proxy 2.0 secure? (AG vs. SPF), (continued)
- Re: Proxy 2.0 secure? (AG vs. SPF) Ryan Russell (Jul 07)
- Re: Proxy 2.0 secure? (AG vs. SPF) Paul D. Robertson (Jul 07)
- Re: Proxy 2.0 secure? (AG vs. SPF) Joseph S. D. Yao (Jul 08)
- Re: Proxy 2.0 secure? (AG vs. SPF) Ryan Russell (Jul 07)
- Re: Proxy 2.0 secure? (AG vs. SPF) Bennett Todd (Jul 07)
- Re: Proxy 2.0 secure? (AG vs. SPF) tqbf (Jul 12)
- Re: Proxy 2.0 secure? (AG vs. SPF) Ryan Russell (Jul 07)
- Re: Proxy 2.0 secure? (AG vs. SPF) Bennett Todd (Jul 07)
- Re: Proxy 2.0 secure? (AG vs. SPF) Ryan Russell (Jul 12)
- Re: Proxy 2.0 secure? (AG vs. SPF) Paul D. Robertson (Jul 12)
- Re: Proxy 2.0 secure? (AG vs. SPF) tqbf (Jul 12)
- Re: Proxy 2.0 secure? (AG vs. SPF) Ryan Russell (Jul 12)
- Re: Proxy 2.0 secure? (AG vs. SPF) Ryan Russell (Jul 07)