Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
Re: State of security technology for the enterprise
From: Brian Loe <knobdy () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 20:33:43 -0500
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Paul D. Robertson <paul () compuwar net> wrote:
I get to have a proxy conversation with a bank tomorrow, because *all* their literature for their ACH service requires "unrestricted Internet access" with (at least according to the manuals, no place to even put a proxy for the HTTS or FTP methods.) *sigh* Paul
It's been awhile since I dealt with ACH - but I had thought that there were "new" and "strict" requirements concerning such transactions these days? An argument against government intervention no doubt. But what private association - or "body" of some sort - has worked well in such things (dietetics association?)? _______________________________________________ firewall-wizards mailing list firewall-wizards () listserv icsalabs com https://listserv.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
Current thread:
- State of security technology for the enterprise Chris Hughes (Apr 29)
- Re: State of security technology for the enterprise ArkanoiD (Apr 29)
- Re: State of security technology for the enterprise miedaner (Apr 29)
- Re: State of security technology for the enterprise Marcin Antkiewicz (Apr 30)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: State of security technology for the enterprise Chris Hughes (Apr 30)
- Re: State of security technology for the enterprise Paul D. Robertson (Apr 30)
- Re: State of security technology for the enterprise Marcus J. Ranum (Apr 30)
- Re: State of security technology for the enterprise Paul D. Robertson (Apr 30)
- Re: State of security technology for the enterprise Brian Loe (Apr 30)
- Re: State of security technology for the enterprise Paul D. Robertson (Apr 30)
- Re: State of security technology for the enterprise Paul D. Robertson (Apr 30)