RE: ISAserver.org - Review of SurfControl Web Filter 5.0 for ISA Server 2004
- From: "Crockett, Gregory" <Gregory.Crockett@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "[ISAserver.org Discussion List]" <isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:21:32 -0600
No fix from SurfControl (SC) -- Jan 2005 tech support had a different
answer. I have been going round and round with SC since September 05 on
this issue. Here is the last msg (27 Jan 05) I received from tech
support.
My SurfControl sales rep told me, just this week, that I must purchase a
"Collector" for SurfControl @ $500 for my 2nd installation of ISA 2000
with SurfControl 5. I currently operate two installs of ISA with
SurfControl 5 - one for SNAT clients and the other for proxy clients. I
asked her why should I pay for their oversight - I have yet to here back
from her.
Have fun!
Greg
---------message from surfcontrol tech support - Jan
2005-------------------
Hello Greg,
It has been reported and should be fix in our future release, QA is
currently investigating this issue and believe it's a Surfcontrol
related.
Thank you,
Anthony
-----Original Message-----
From: Crockett, Gregory [mailto:Gregory.Crockett@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 10:49 AM
To: Anthony Liu
Subject: RE: [isalist] RE: SecureNAT -- Redirect to local Web Proxy
service
-----Original Message-----
From: Ball, Dan [mailto:DBall@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 1:50 PM
To: [ISAserver.org Discussion List]
Subject: [isalist] RE: ISAserver.org - Review of SurfControl Web Filter
5.0 for ISA Server 2004
http://www.ISAserver.org
Are you sure? I checked that page, and it had a good sized list of
other browsers and their signatures (of course, they are being blocked
now here).
Oh, and I just got off the phone with SurfControl, the person I was
talking to claims that the reason they can't filter SecureNAT sessions
is because they can't get a "Source IP", the ISA server hides that, so
they drop the packet from filtering. I passed on a summary of what
David said he did to fix a possible similar problem, but he didn't seem
to want to hear it.
So, since a fix from SurfControl doesn't seem to be anywhere near being
on the horizon, anyone have any ideas how to block all SecureNAT
sessions? I have no problems with "requiring" all users to use the FWC.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ara [mailto:ara@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 13:11
To: [ISAserver.org Discussion List]
Subject: [isalist] RE: ISAserver.org - Review of SurfControl Web Filter
5.0 for ISA Server 2004
http://www.ISAserver.org
Oops! I forgot to post the link
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/isa/2004/plan/commonapplica
tionsignatures.mspx
-----Original Message-----
From: Ara
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 10:07 AM
To: '[ISAserver.org Discussion List]'
Subject: RE: ISAserver.org - Review of SurfControl Web Filter 5.0 for
ISA Server 2004
Tom,
Very good choice but where can I find signatures for other browsers? I
have followed this link and it only provides IE, or can I create a rule
that client header has to be IE?
------------------------------------------------------
List Archives: http://www.webelists.com/cgi/lyris.pl?enter=isalist
ISA Server Newsletter: http://www.isaserver.org/pages/newsletter.asp
ISA Server FAQ: http://www.isaserver.org/pages/larticle.asp?type=FAQ
------------------------------------------------------
Other Internet Software Marketing Sites:
World of Windows Networking: http://www.windowsnetworking.com
Leading Network Software Directory: http://www.serverfiles.com
No.1 Exchange Server Resource Site: http://www.msexchange.org
Windows Security Resource Site: http://www.windowsecurity.com/
Network Security Library: http://www.secinf.net/
Windows 2000/NT Fax Solutions: http://www.ntfaxfaq.com
------------------------------------------------------
You are currently subscribed to this ISAserver.org Discussion List as:
gregory.crockett@xxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe visit http://www.webelists.com/cgi/lyris.pl?enter=isalist
Report abuse to listadmin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Other related posts:
