[isapros] Re: [ISAServer] FW: Cisco Security Advisory: Windows VPN Client Local PrivilegeEscalation Vulnerability
- From: Jim Harrison <jim@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 14:39:28 -0700
Looks like someone needs a hug...
Sent via WM5-enabled PPC-phone
-----Original Message-----
From: "Dana Epp" <dana@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: isaserver@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 7/28/06 13:45
Subject: [isapros] Re: [ISAServer] FW: Cisco Security Advisory: Windows VPN
Client Local PrivilegeEscalation Vulnerability
Hey Tom,
Feel free to promote ISAs benefits all you want. You know I am a fan of ISA
Praising ISA and talking about its powers is always welcome on the list. I just
don't think we need to belittle other vendors to do it. ISA can stand on its
own.... it doesn't need us to stoop to vendor bashing to prove it.
---
Regards,
Dana Epp [Microsoft Security MVP]
Blog: http://silverstr.ufies.org/blog/
________________________________
From: Thomas W Shinder [mailto:tshinder@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Fri 7/28/2006 10:30 AM
To: isaserver@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ISAServer] FW: Cisco Security Advisory: Windows VPN Client Local
PrivilegeEscalation Vulnerability
Given that this is allegedly an ISA firewall MVP list, I think a little
"fanboy" behavior is completely appropriate.
And if you had to deal with the PIX "cluckers" and their idiot echo
chamber every day trying teach them that hardware didn't come down from
Mt. Olympus, you'd appreciate the need for letting out a little steam.
Thomas W Shinder, M.D.
Site: www.isaserver.org
Blog: http://blogs.isaserver.org/shinder/
Book: http://tinyurl.com/3xqb7
MVP -- ISA Firewalls
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dana Epp [mailto:dana@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 11:37 AM
> To: isaserver@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ISAServer] FW: Cisco Security Advisory: Windows
> VPN Client Local PrivilegeEscalation Vulnerability
>
> Oh come now. Throwing stones is pretty silly at this point. Especially
> since Microsoft isn't a security company either, and seems to have its
> hands in what... Firewalls, VPNs, AntiVirus, Patch Management etc etc.
>
> Cisco has a lot of bright minds in the security arena. They
> too have an
> uphill battle in educating their developers in writing secure
> software.
> Give 'em a break.
>
> Talking negative over a competitor is a waste of everyone's time. When
> its not appropriate for anti-M$ sentiment here, it shouldn't be for
> other
All mail to and from this domain is GFI-scanned.
Other related posts:
