Check Point (small office, Internet Gateway for 25 users, etc) and Cisco (PIX 506, etc) have solutions for branch offices and small business. I think that later the company will not have problem with security.
Cheers Kleber "Vachon, Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>In regards to your statement about a netgear router. A device that does >>nat and port forwarding is not a firewall. > >It is not a "true" firewall, though it is marketed as one. > >> Easily hackable. > >Can you point us to evidence to support this statement ? > >>There is no rulebase in one of those things. > >Not true. The Netgear routers do allow one to implement a rulebase via the >CLI. > >>You could easily get the cisco pix or as I prefer a checkpoint FW1 for >small business. I am very big on checkpoint and it has got a lot more >features then a cisco pix. > >Easily get ? You are assuming that a small business can " > >1) Afford a PIX or Checkpoint FW >2) Afford training so as to properly administrate devices from #1. >3) Afford to hire a person proficient on #1. > >IMHO , a small business could do very well with one of the SOHO NATting >devices. They could further enhance the protection by ensuing all the host >systems have the latest patches, and up-to-date anti-virus software running. >Yes, you are correct that PIX and FW-1 are better but, the key word was >"small business." > >~S~ > >Disclaimer: My own two cents ! > -- __________________________________________________________________ Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/
