mailing list archives
Re: is NAC dead?
From: Jack Daniel <jackadaniel () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 09:58:11 -0400
Ugh, "journalists" with agendas. I wouldn't accept Joel's conclusions on
much of anything without running them through your own reality filters.
(Anyone else's, either, including mine. But especially his).
NAC/NAP were (and still are) poorly defined, therefore hard to specify; they
were/are generally complicated and hard to implement. Many (most?) are
trivial to bypass.
All that said, it can be useful for managing/cleaning a network. If you
want to really lock down and protect a secure and clean network, it probably
won't make you happy. If you are trying to get a handle on the typical
network mess and improve management/visibility, NAC might be pretty good if
you can justify the expense.
I would suggest taking a look at Bradford and Napera (based on
recommendations of people I trust, not personal experience). I've been
playing with the NetClarity NACwall appliance (also sold under the BlackBox
name), I like it- but they are friends of mine so YMMV.
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 8:33 AM, Albert R. Campa <abcampa () gmail com> wrote:
Anyone still looking into NAC or actually using a NAC type solution? I am
looking at hardware or agentless NAC, but came across this article and
havent heard much about it.
Pauldotcom mailing list
Pauldotcom () mail pauldotcom com
Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com