I have a client, A large firm of lawyers. They use PC's & servers for their legal work & document printing. No connection to the internet at all for that network. Updates are by DVD & remote deployment.
They have MAC's for email & internet. Email hosted off site. S -----Original Message----- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 2:04 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: LogMeIn Thoroughly agree. Hell, I'm fighting a battle now to keep personal machines from connecting via VPN. My mantra: "If the hardware isn't owned and controlled by the company, I don't want it on the company network." I'm beginning to wonder if all companies should maintain two physically separate networks and provide their employees with two computers - one that connects to the world, and one that is for core applications *only*. Kurt On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 6:15 AM, Ben Scott <mailvor...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 9:01 AM, David Lum <david....@nwea.org> wrote: >> I work for a company with ~300 employees, is there a reason to discourage a >> few of our employees from installing LogMeIn Free on their systems ... > > You're letting an outside organization have control of one of your > computers. You're okay with that? Cool, can I have control of one of > your computers, too? I promise I won't do anything bad. Pinky swear! > > Sure, all these remote-control companies claim to have great > security. *Everybody* claims that. And yet, major security problems > keep on happening, all over the place, all the time. From this, we > can conclude that claims of great security mean precisely nothing. > > "Security problems" don't have to mean them taking over the world. > It doesn't have to mean organization-wide intent. It could be one > employee with a grudge. Or maybe an undetected remote compromise on a > server in their datacenter -- these are high-profile targets, and > custom malware would be undetectable by signature-based virus > scanners. Or maybe they cut back on security spending when the > economy tanked. It might not be something you could detect -- passive > monitoring would be invisible. It might not even be something with > specific intent -- maybe random malware makes it into their systems, > and then propagates over the remote-control system to you. > > -- Ben > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
