On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com> wrote: > On 03/24/2014 09:20 AM, William Herrin wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Karl Auer <ka...@biplane.com.au> wrote: >>> Addressable is not the same as >>> accessible; routable is not the same as routed. >> >> Indeed. However, all successful security is about _defense in depth_. >> If it is inaccessible, unrouted, unroutable and unaddressable then you >> have four layers of security. If it is merely inaccessible and >> unrouted you have two. > > A distinction without a difference, IMHO. Either I can send you an incoming > SYN or I can't.
Hi Mike, You can either press the big red button and fire the nukes or you can't, so what difference how many layers of security are involved with the "Football?" I say this with the utmost respect, but you must understand the principle of defense in depth in order to make competent security decisions for your organization. Smart people disagree on the details but the principle is not only iron clad, it applies to all forms of security, not just IP network security. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
