On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, HUNGRY PIRANHA wrote:
> all,
>
> mr. morrow hits the nail on the head.
Perhaps you can explain how that nail is hit on the head and at the same
time the product in question sits approved for use in national security
environments by NCSC?
>
> paul, i dont remember seeing you at any of the air force
> briefings on findings for recommendations to the 38th eis wing in regards to
> why checkpoint products were not considered for the cits nms bip, dms or
> spawar projects. the premise of intel shenanigans was PRECISELY what the nsa
> contingent stated in these meetings.
> of course, there were other considerations for why
> sidewinder was chosen (X.500 complicane among others..
>
> besides, i could probably figure out a way to get a lamer like you to hand
> me your moms last 500$ bucks.
You said:
"it may be true that you have seen chkptfw-1 in use at dod sites, but not
under the auspices of dod,,likely a wing or base commander who doesnt care
whats going on as long it doesnt screw up his career."
To which I cited a DoD site which specificly has FW-1 listed as *approved*
for protecting national security interests by NCSC. In case you're
*really* dense, that's "Under the auspices of dod[sic]."
You also said:
"the nsa would take great interest in knowing what backdoors
the 'ha-Mossad le-Modiin ule-Tafkidim Meyuhadim' might have available to
them"
Yet, provided with the _fact_ that NSA has approved FW-1 and that it's
certified under their program, the best rebuttal that you can come up with
is "besides, i could probably figure out a way to get a lamer like you
to hand me your moms last 500$ bucks."
Once again, in case you're really dense, NSA's interest in backdoors
wouldn't include approving the product for use in national security
sensative arenas. They like to be the only keyholders for backdoors.
Better clean off that mirror before you start looking for lamers, it'll
increase your success rate significantly. You might wanna swing by
Amazon.com and see if you can find a book on insults too.
Ad Hominem personal attacks in the face of overwhelming factual evidence
lowers your credibility substantially especially when hiding behind
aliases and hotmail accounts (or is that uber-krad vogue these days?)
That $500 came from pimping your mom's skank ass for $2.50 a shot.
Paul
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Robertson "My statements in this message are personal opinions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] which may have no basis whatsoever in fact."
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
