Don Kelloway wrote:
> 
> Yes, I'm aware of that too...
> 
> But we shouldn't forget that the same applies to the other os's either. If I
if you�ve read my mail i am quite aware of that ...

> remember correctly, XENIX which has an even higher TCSEC rating has been
> certified to only run on a Intel 386... <grin>
wowwwwwwww ... a 386, really ... bet on it, windows would not even run
on it *eg*

greetz from Vienna

Hannes

> 
> Best Regards, Donald Kelloway
> http://www.commodon.com
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johann G. Hautzinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Don Kelloway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Friday, June 04, 1999 1:45 AM
> Subject: Re: Why not NT?
> 
> >Don Kelloway wrote:
> >[...]
> >
> >> But IMO, I think people are either forgetting or overlooking the fact
> that
> >> the Windows NT4 op/sys can be made "C2" and "E3/F-C2" secure and that the
> >> installation of a properly configured NT-based firewall on top of such a
> >> system can provide an equally solid, stable, security solution as any
> >> other...
> >>
> >> For those who aren't familiar with the acronyms mentioned above:
> >>
> >> "E3/F-C2" is widely acknowledged to be the highest ITSEC evaluation
> rating
> >> that can be achieved by a general-purpose operating system and "C2" is
> >> widely acknowledged to be the highest TCSEC evaluation rating that can be
> >> achieved by a general-purpose operating system.
> >>
> >> With regards to NT4's "E3/F-C2" compliance, here's a brief summary:
> >>
> >> On April 28th, 1999, the UK Government announced that Microsoft� Windows
> NT�
> >> Server and Workstation 4.0 had completed a successful evaluation under
> the
> >> ITSEC regime at the E3/F-C2 level. E3/F-C2 is widely acknowledged to be
> the
> >> highest ITSEC evaluation rating that can be achieved by a general-purpose
> >> operating system.
> >>
> >> For the rest, see
> http://www.microsoft.com/security/issues/e3fc2summary.asp
> >[...]
> >
> >hi there,
> >
> >just wanted to mention one point, which - according to my opinion - is
> >_very_ important when talking �bout c2 and others in that row:
> >
> >these security standards are given to _complete_ systems only (i.e.
> >software _plus_ hardware), nt 3.51 made it on a compaq standalone (_no_
> >network), nt 4.x didn�t make it yet, as far as i know (_still_, i�d like
> >to say - after being sold for quite a while now ...) ... if you do not
> >have _exactely_ the same hardware there is _absolutely_ no way of making
> >it c2 safe (as the standard "c2" is a combination of software _and_
> >hardware features), maybe one can reach the software part of c2 using it
> >on different hardware, but i am quite sure that _any_ os _can_ be made
> >c2 safe (nearly any - anyway ;-)
> >
> >ahhhh - yesssssss - there was one good laugh i had in an nt course i was
> >attending one year ago ... there is sort of c2 security advisor (i think
> >in the resource kit, as far as i remember), which helps to make your
> >computer c2 safe - the first thing it said was: "please turn of network
> >support" - good shot :-)
> >
> >c2 was quite a good marketing gag anyway - at least talking �bout
> >windows ...
> >
> >greetz from Vienna
> >
> >Hannes
> >
> >--
> >Johann Georg Hautzinger              http://treasury.erstebank.at
> >Erste Bank AG - OE 560 - IT & Workflow Management
> >Boersegasse 14                                  Tel.: 536 31 1907
> >1010 Wien                                     email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >

-- 
Johann Georg Hautzinger              http://treasury.erstebank.at
Erste Bank AG - OE 560 - IT & Workflow Management
Boersegasse 14                                  Tel.: 536 31 1907
1010 Wien                                     email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]

Reply via email to