I've noticed the lack of input. I suspect Cisco has forbid their folks from posting useful information to this list anymore. Unfortunately my team can't get useful answers from TAC. (STILL!)
I also am a Perfigo early adopter and no longer think Cisco is a viable alternative in this space. I've tried for YEARS to try and get them to see how shoe-horning this product into the router support model doesn't work, how a product like this needs aggressive support for new vulnerabilities and changes. I thought things were going to get better, but it doesn't look like it. Cisco- if you're out there, why don't you just admit you don't care about this product line, and EOS/L it so that we can have more traction when asking for funds to upgrade to other products? Or state that it isn't suited to the Higher-ed market? I must add that I am glad Perfigo was where it was when we started to really need it. Getting CCA implemented across our campus was a real win from a resource perspective - many fewer viruses. But this product has not grown/been supported in a way that makes it viable any more, as you put so well, Rand. My team likes Impulse and Juniper's solutions so far. We're going to start looking at those soon. Perhaps we should set up another listserv somewhere - product independent? Cheers, Eric Eric Weakland, CISSP, CNE Director, Information Security Office of Information Technology American University eric at american.edu 202.885.2241 ______________________________________ AU IT will never ask for your password via e-mail. Don't share your password with anyone! "Hall, Rand" <[email protected]> Sent by: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators <[email protected]> 04/02/2009 08:50 AM Please respond to Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators <[email protected]> To [email protected] cc Subject Re: IE 8 Anyone notice the recent dearth of Cisco input on this list? I find that troubling. Direct quotes on the list last fall from a Cisco support person (name omitted because he's innocent): "Word from the BU is that they will only update from Microsoft once a month, so this one will not go into the checks and rule set until next months Patch Tuesday release." "All I can say is that myself and some of my colleagues did put some pressure on to add this in. I know we sound like a broken record when we say this, but I would strongly encourage anyone who is unhappy about this to tell their account teams and have them put pressure on from their side as well." So, this will be at least the third time in six months that Cisco's shrugging ambivalence has made their product ineffective. In October, Microsoft issued a critical out-of-band patch for which Cisco would not create checks. In November, Cisco botched an update which ultimately prevented access to the aforementioned and now long-awaited out-of-band patch check. And now, IE8. The first two times I followed the prescribed advice and ran my concern up through my account team...and heard nothing. Unfortunately, I think I'm going to be forced to return the favor. I'm one of the original Perfigo people who's got the end of life software. When the Cisco NAC RFQ line doesn't this summer ring they'll know it was me. So, Bruce, how do you like Bradford? Cheers, Rand -- Rand P. Hall * Director, Network Services Merrimack College * SunGard Higher Education 315 Turnpike Street, North Andover MA 01845 * Tel 978-837-5000 Fax 978-837-5383 * [email protected] * www.sungardhe.com CONFIDENTIALITY: This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information, and unauthorized disclosure or use is prohibited. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender and delete this e-mail from your system. -----Original Message----- From: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Osborne, Bruce W. (NS) Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 7:26 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: IE 8 Rob, That is correct. You have to update each OS rule. Rinse & repeat after every "Patch Tuesday" update. Bruce -----Original Message----- From: Robert J. Rutkowski [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 6:09 PM Subject: Re: IE 8 Correct me if I'm wrong please.. In order to use this manually created check, if I don't have any other manual checks incorporated into my hotfix rules, then I need to make copies of every hotfix rule (XP, XP MCE, XP Tablet, Vista Basic, Vista Home Premium, etc...) and add this check as an OR for the IE area to all of my copies, and then enable them for the Requirement. This is the way I understood it, I could very well be incorrect though. It seems like a lot of work just to tell it to allow IE8. Also, if that's what needs to be done, then why can't Cisco simply update their hotfix rules for everyone? It's sad that they would tell you how to manually do a workaround, but not just do it themselves... Rob -----Original Message----- From: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Roberto Montoya Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 2:06 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: IE 8 This is what we got on a case that we opened. "For now we will have to create a custom check until the next agent version download has been released. Here is an outline for the customer check that you can put in place: Check Category - Registry Check Check Type - Registry Value Registry Key - HLKM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\ Value Name - Version Value Data Type - String Operator - starts with Value Data - 8.0 For now we are expecting support for IE8 within the next two weeks. Right now there is a bug for this issue and is listed below: Bug ID: CSCsy62611" HTH, -Roberto -----Original Message----- From: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Terry Mitchell Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 9:52 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: IE 8 Anyone from Cisco/NAC team willing provide an estimate for IE8 support (days, weeks or months?). It doesn't have to be carved in stone, but a ballpark estimate would be most useful for planning and support purposes. Thanks in advance. Terry
