RE: Assessment tools/Scanners

[gshipley () neohapsis com (Greg Shipley)]

On Fri, 8 Oct 1999, Staggs, Michael wrote:

> Good day all. In response to the below comment concerning NAI's CyberCop
> licensing model... The current canned agreement is based upon the number of
> nodes present on the licencee's network. Mr Shipley is quite correct when he
> opines (pardon the paraphrase, sir) that this model can be a real headache
> at times.
>
> However, please note that NAI sales personnel have the lattitude to change
> this standard agreement on the terms and conditions of sale. They can make
> that license say node, network, subnet, host, connections, even days of the
> week- anything that is mutually agreeable to both parties.

Huh.  Interesting.  I'd love to be introduced to such a sales person,
because here, in Chicago, this was SPECIFICALLY STATED as NOT an option by
my "Chicago" sales rep.  I was told:

NAI: "Cybercop Scanner is licensed on a per-node basis."
Me: "You mean per-server I want to scan?"
NAI: "No, on how many nodes you have on your network"
Me: "Well suppose I have 100 servers and 2,600 desktops?  I don't want to
     scan my desktops."
NAI: "It will cost x/per node."
Me: "So what happens if I have 100 servers and 500 desktops?"
NAI: "Then the cost is reduced to y/per node."
Me: "Doesn't that seem sort of silly?  I'm not going to scan my desktops,
I'm just going to scan my servers..."
NAI: "That's just the way it is."
Me: "So basically this is licensed the same way as your virus scanner?"
NAI: "Correct"
Me: "Is there anyway around this?"
NAI: "No."
 
So how big does one have to be before such flexibility is demonstrated?

Thanks,

-Greg