Sounds slightly strange to have to evaluate a new, untested FW, from a
company which is better known for it's security "enhancments", well-working
programs, and no bugs (like right) such as M$, with a software such as BM
that has been working for some years, and is recognised as a full fledged FW
and used as such in thousands of sights around the world.
It drives me nuts sometimes to see the "We allways have to compare M$ to
Novell to see who's better" when all you have to do is see the trend,
reliability and time-life of a product to know there is simply no
comparison.
Mike
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin H Hoz-Salvador [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: a ea?e 22 2000 19:37
> To: Little, Craig
> Cc: 'Paquette, Trevor'; 'Newman, Steven';
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Rossiter, Dean (SSI)
> Subject: Re: [FW1] Microsoft Firewalls
>
>
> "Little, Craig" wrote:
> >
> > It sounds like a dressed up version of the Proxy Server
> >
>
> Yep! I've to compare it with Novell's Border Manager.
>
> And when I see http://www.securityfocus.com/vdb/stats.html
>
> I definetly don't think Microsoft may be a choice when
> you look for security... :-)
>
>
> -- M. Hoz
>
>
> ==========================================================================
> ======
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at
> http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html
> ==========================================================================
> ======
================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at
http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html
================================================================================
