
Security Basics mailing list archives
RE: terminal server security vs vpn
From: "Brent Kern" <bkern () sib ok gov>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 08:38:10 -0500
We went through this at our government agency and the remote desktop client is 128bit encrypted. We found it on Microsoft's website, terminal server seemed to be the most logical solution with the least administrative overhead. Thanks, Brent Kern IT Network Management Specialist -----Original Message----- From: listbounce () securityfocus com [mailto:listbounce () securityfocus com] On Behalf Of Chris Barber Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 2:18 PM To: Juan B Cc: security basics Subject: Re: terminal server security vs vpn Juan, If you use SSL-VPN you will not need a client, or at worst you will not be required to install a client before you can make the connection. The only thing needed from that standpoint is a browser. This makes VPN more "Web Like" and easier on the user, without compromising your security. i would contact one of the loacl resellers in your area and ask for a demo Cisco, Juniper, Aventail and Checkpoint all have SSL-VPN solutions that are quite nice. I prefer the Juniper myself. Hope this helps Chris. On 8/13/07, Juan B <juanbabi () yahoo com> wrote:
Hi, I am looking for a solution to my users so they can log in from home and work connect to there office pc's, of course I will use terminlal server. My question is, why to use double encryption, why use vpn client to connect to the corporate FW and then to connect throw it with a ts session, AFAIK Ts is encrypted as well and one can set the encryption to high which is the same as VPN right? I want to nake the connection simple to the user and securure. do I need also a vpn client, I guess not, am I missing something here? I will also change the port to increase security. Thanks a lot, Juan ____________________________________________________________________________________ Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel. http://travel.yahoo.com/
The contents of this electronic message, including attachments, are transmitted by the Oklahoma State and Education Employees Group Insurance Board, an Oklahoma government agency according to the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, 12A O.S. 15-101 et seq. This message is intended for use by the named addressee only and may contain information that is confidential or private according to state or federal laws. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify the sender by a reply to sender only message, delete it completely from your computer and maintain confidentiality of the message. Any unauthorized disclosure, distribution, or use of the contents of this message is prohibited and subjects the user to penalty of law.
Current thread:
- terminal server security vs vpn Juan B (Aug 13)
- Re: terminal server security vs vpn Chris Barber (Aug 13)
- RE: terminal server security vs vpn Brent Kern (Aug 14)
- Re: terminal server security vs vpn Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers (Aug 14)
- RE: terminal server security vs vpn Chandresh Dedhia (Aug 14)
- RE: terminal server security vs vpn Brent Kern (Aug 14)
- RE: terminal server security vs vpn Beauford, Jason (Aug 13)
- Re: terminal server security vs vpn Deno Vichas (Aug 13)
- RE: terminal server security vs vpn Mngadi, Simphiwe (SS) (Aug 14)
- Re: terminal server security vs vpn Isaac Perez (Aug 14)
- Re: terminal server security vs vpn Brian Loe (Aug 14)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: terminal server security vs vpn abhicc285 (Aug 14)
- Re: terminal server security vs vpn nobledark (Aug 14)
- Re: terminal server security vs vpn Chris Barber (Aug 13)