Re: Email security Best Practices; was RE: Email Security Poll

["joe" <joej () rocknyou com>]

<Is it reasonable to completely ban attachments?>

I'm inclined to think not. Its like opening a flood gate and trying to close
it. Simply put, even dropping passworded Zip files for me has churned
a large degree of debate/resistance from my management and users.
My arguing that SMTP is not FTP, hasn't won me any leverage based
in part from the countering "We used to be able to do this".
Of course theres always the argument "Censorship" too, which leads
me to believe, their lemmings and I'm just going to have to find another
way to fix a problem that has no signs of going away.

But, just my 2¢s
Cheers
-Joe


----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher J. Wolff" <chris () bblabs com>
To: <nanog () merit edu>
Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 3:26 PM
Subject: Email security Best Practices; was RE: Email Security Poll


> Based on Jon's results, it is reasonable to conclude that most corporate
> network operators provide some level of email security.  Any given
> corporation can establish top-down policies mandating the use of an email
> security product.  Said corporation only needs to manage compliance with
the
> policy.
>
> However, in the context of the commercial email operation there is a
> delicate balance between email security and sales prevention.
>
> My question is, at what point does email security become too onerous for
the
> ISP customer?  Is it reasonable to completely ban attachments?
>
> Thank you for your time.
>
> Regards,
> Christopher J. Wolff, VP CIO
> Broadband Laboratories, Inc.
> http://www.bblabs.com