>Brad Shifflett wrote:
>>
>> The user is a very high political figure who is real cautious about
>security
>> and paranoid. I like the idea of a seperate nic in the server and two
>> subnets. The cost of switches could be a deciding factor. Thanks for the
>> input guys!
>
>
>
>I hope he doesn't figure out that if the server gets compromised,
>he may be compromised along with it... =)
>
It rather puzzles me how much emphasis the paranoid put on physical
protection, yet don't seem to consider end-to-end encryption.
Some of the military security guidelines do insist on physically
separate switches, patch panels, etc. Remember, though, that they
may have defined their environments for situations where the
operators may have the minor distractions of being shot at.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=4050&t=4038
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
