At 3:18 PM +0000 6/20/03, annlee wrote: >SAFE does start out with the explicit assumption that a Security Policy is >already in place.
A valid observation. Still, with this specific post, there doesn't seem to be either a threat assessment or a security policy, just a request for mechanisms (not even in an architecture like SAFE). To coin a phrase, what problem is the original poster trying to solve? > >FWIW, there is an example Security Polcy in the MCNS course book from Cisco >Press -- >Mike Wenstrom's book -- > >http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1578701031/qid=1056122196/sr=1-21/ref=sr_1_21/104-7746290-9333516?v=glance&s=books > >There are places where I disagree with how it's put together, but they >really are more differeneces of style rather than substance. > >Annlee > >""Howard C. Berkowitz"" wrote in message >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> As you've reminded me many times, Annlee, one really needs a security >> policy and a threat assessment before going into the details of the >> security architecture solution. SAFE doesn't give much guidance on >> policy formulation. >> >> I'm concerned with the goal statement of the original poster, "Want >> to go for network security, e.g., protect against virus attack," when >> virus attack isn't even a network security issue -- it's a host >> issue. Arguably, worm, as opposed to virus attacks, are both host and >> network, because they can affect bandwidth. >> >> >> At 1:40 PM +0000 6/19/03, annlee wrote: >> >Here's a good place to start -- >> > >> >>http://www.cisco.com/en/US/netsol/ns110/ns170/ns171/ns128/networking_soluti >ons_package.html >> > >> >Pick a blueprint appropriate to your organization's size and the type of >> >networking you do. SAFE is a mental architecture, as much as anything -- >> >it's a "think about the whole problem but solve it in increments" kind of >> >approach, I think. >> > >> >HTH >> > >> >Annlee >> > >> >""milind tare"" wrote in message >> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Dear All, >> >> >> >> >> >> i hv following setup;- >> >> >> >> >> >> 2 6506 core switches having redundancy. 10 Nos. 3508 >> >> Distribution Switches. and 3500 series access's >> >> switches. in whole plant i hv 140 switches. >> >> >> >> want to go for network security. e.g. protect from >> >> virus attact , hacking so can anyone sugest me cisco >> >> product. please give me the URL also so i can study. >> >> >> >> Thanks & Regards, >> > > milind Tare Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71013&t=70841 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
