On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 09:18:28AM -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 8:44 AM Chad Sheridan <chadapsheri...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > As a sysadmin, I welcome all of the changes. As far as warnings/alerts, I > > can safely say, most of our clients don't read them anyway. > > > > > Can those machines be put behind a proxy? > > > > As for this, of course they can, but some clients will be tied up with so > > much red tape and budgetary BS that it's a solution that isn't feasible in > > a reasonable time frame. > > ++. Medical devices certified 10 or 15 years ago won't be able to > pivot as quickly as most people would like. And as I understand > things, the certifications for medical equipment can be lengthier and > more expensive than NIST's Cryptographic Module Validation Program. > > (It's somewhat amazing how often Windows CE and Windows Mobile crop up > every now and again). > > Jeff
Why does this prevent using a proxy in front of the device? I mean something like (patched) stunnel or another generic TLS reterminating proxy, not something specific to the device. -- Sincerely, Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers) Invisible Things Lab
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
