|
|
|
 |
|
October 21, 2002
|
|
"ISPs should be required to provide security services to their customers."
-- Saul Rodriguez
|
|
Living With Linux
I agree with Don MacVittie's assertion in "Are You Locked Into Red Hat?" (Sept. 30, 2002) that we don't want to create another Microsoft in the Linux arena, and expecting that there will be a wide variety of Linux flavors in the future is probably reasonable. Wouldn't it be nice, though, if I could make a program on my Caldera system and then make the same program on my Red Hat box? Generally, I can't do this for a variety of reasons, mostly having to do with lack of standardization. So I espouse some level of standards for Linux distros. I believe, however, that we can attain this without eliminating vendor competition.
My Linux experience is limited--I've run Slackware, Caldera and Red Hat--but I have to say that while my Red Hat is probably closest to being a usable desktop system, none of them has the level of "friendliness" necessary to take over the desktop market. On the other hand, I don't have many problems with users installing software on a Linux system, which is more than I can say about any Windows versions I've managed over the years.
David Petrie
President
David Petrie Associates
david@davidpetrieassociates.com
 |
Big Concern
I found "Of No Small Concern" (Sept. 2, 2002) very interesting and agree with Robert Moskowitz that small businesses and homes with DSL or cable modems are at risk because their systems could be used for relaying an SMTP or other attack via the Internet. This is why ISPs should be required to provide security services to their customers as part of their basic services.
Some ISPs provide these services for an additional fee, and many small businesses, ignorant of the risks, choose to have no security. If ISPs are made responsible for Internet security, perhaps some smaller providers will go out of business, but this will be OK as long as the Internet is secure.
Saul Rodriguez
Business System Consultant
Baxter Healthcare Corp.
srodrigu@myrealbox.com
|
Spam Trimmings
Thank you, Ron Anderson, for your great article on anti-spam techniques ("The Anti-Spam Cookbook," Sept. 15, 2002). I think you hit it exactly. I have a couple of questions: What mail server do you use, such that you can use mail-abuse.org and/or similar blacklists? Microsoft Exchange is dramatically underpowered in this area. Also, how do you justify the costs associated with such services?
Bruce Kube
Systems Administrator
Trendstat Capital Management
E-mail address withheld on request
Ron Anderson responds: The small server I discuss in the article uses CommuniGate Pro 3.5.9. Of the three RBL services we use, only one charges: $200 per year for up to 100 mailboxes. We don't justify expenses this small, but if I needed to, based on the number of spam messages we deflect, I'd easily be able to make a case for spending 10 times this amount.
|
Precision Decision
I am evaluating MoMs for my organization and am interested in your findings in "Hot MoMs!" (Aug. 5, 2002), specifically regarding Micromuse Netcool.
You state that Netcool does not have a very strong event correlation system. But recently Micromuse acquired Riversoft and included the Layer 2/3 discovery and event correlation piece to its Precision 3.1 suite. Do you think Riversoft/Precision 3.1 would have made a great difference in your classification against the Smarts results if you had tested it?
Alain H. Duminy
Head, Data Networks
Information Systems & Technology Specialist
Office of Information Systems & Technology
Asian Development Bank
aduminy@adb.org
Bruce Boardman replies: I can't tell without testing, but the Riversoft technology seems to be exactly what Micromuse needs. The Riversoft product is a good correlation engine, and Micromuse has the expertise to pull this off.
|
Clarification
Our Aug. 5, 2002 cover package ("Hot MoMs!") elicited questions from vendors and readers about the functions and pricing of the so-called manager of manager products we reviewed. This isn't surprising, since these management products are engineered to be modular to accommodate complex implementations.
For example, neither pricing scenario we outlined required the participating vendors to price root-cause analysis as an additional feature, though under that scenario, vendors like Aprisma that bundle such functionality would have fared better in our scoring than others that don't include it. Aprisma maintains that this pricing model unfairly weighted our review in favor of the winner, Smarts, whose root-cause analysis is priced separately. Smarts stands by its pricing listed in the article.
Network Computing sees no need to change our product analysis and report card ratings, but we urge readers to seek detailed pricing from vendors on MoM products they're considering.
|
Corrections
• In "Business Intelligence With Smarts" (Sept. 30, 2002), we should have included Apache and IBM WebSphere in the list of Web servers supported by Brio Intelligence 6.6.
• Contrary to what we stated in our Sneak Preview of Neoteris IVE ("Faster Than a Speeding VPN--Super Remote Access With Neoteris IVE," Sept. 15, 2002), when using the product to group users you can assign users to multiple groups and create subgroups.
Tell us how you really feel. Write to us at editor@nwc.com. Include your name, title, company name, e-mail address and phone number. All correspondence becomes the property of Network Computing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RSS
