Gary,
#Regular patches.
#Perhaps a regular vulnerability scan. Perhaps done by the ISP.
Agreed.
So the following is a list of things that should be done at a minimum to be
on the internet
firewall
authentication of some sort to log onto machines
regular patches
possibly a vulnerability scan
I still do not think this constitutes a 'secure network' just the bare
minimum and that is ok for a lot of small networks or home users. I have
to put up with jaywalking pedestrians, speeders, ect when I drive so when I
am on the net I expect to put up with annoyances too. Does this mean that
the hacker shouldn't be punished if he is caught? No, but it does mean that
we shouldn't have to have Fort Knox style security just to have a DSL line.
#What if cell phones allowed you to run code of your choice on them?
Wouldn't
#that be modifying them?
If they sell me a cell phone that they advertize as being able to run code
and I buy code from a company that makes code for that cell phone then I
should be able to assume that that cell phone still stays withing
regulations.
#What about a swimming pool with a two foot, flimsy fence? Or more apt, one
#with a hole in it you were warned about?
What about tresspassing? Why weren't the parents watching out after their
own kids. Once again, though, these two examples really don't fit the
subject.
I think that the Internet should be available to any person or business
that wants to make use of it. I believe that part of being a good citizen
on the web is preventing your computer from being used against your wished
to do bad things. Most people do not know how to do this. The best they
can do is maybe install a personal firewall. This should not prevent them
from being allowed to participate. Businesses that had their networks
hacked and were used by hackers to launch other attacks are victims not
perpetrators of crimes.
Regards,
Jeffery Gieser
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
