Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Analytics

5/24/2007
01:55 AM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

NAC Vendors in the Hot Seat

Cisco, Microsoft shared the dais, and their thoughts on NAC, here yesterday at Interop

LAS VEGAS -- Interop -- The big fish in network access control were together here yesterday: Cisco, Juniper, McAfee, and Microsoft, which nearly stole the show earlier in the week by announcing a deal with Trusted Computing Group. (See Vendors Get Their NAC Together.)

The four NAC rivals seemed mostly on the same page here during the "Truth About NAC" panel yesterday. Except, of course, when the talk came to standards. Cisco is now the only vendor that's not working with the TCG, and it's looking conspicuously lonely.

"We're down from three standards to two, but that's still one too many," said Vimal Solanki, senior director of worldwide product marketing for McAfee.

Russell Rice, director of product management for Cisco, said Cisco is focusing its standardization energy on the Internet Engineering Task Force's (IETF) emerging Network Endpoint Assessment specification. "That's the right area for standardization for us," he said. (See IETF Trains Its Sights On NAC.)

Cisco has held interoperability testing and demos with Microsoft and McAfee, and those interfaces will be built into Windows Server 2008 beta release, which will ship later this year, according to Paul Mayfield, group program manager for Microsoft.

Mayfield also said the upcoming Windows XP Service Pack 3 will include a NAC client. "Having the agent built into the OS reduces the cost of NAC deployment."

Rice, meanwhile, noted that in three of the four customer briefings he attended during Interop, the organizations were concerned about their outside contractors, or guest users, infecting their networks with their client machines. "NAC is for getting a handle on all the devices you can't easily manage, such as guests," he said, as well as reducing the risk of infection from internal clients.

Paul Hoffman, director of the Cybersecurity Association and moderator of the panel, said he was surprised the panelists were automatically including remote access in their NAC strategies, and not treating it as a special case. "All we care about is trusted access," says Karthik Krishnan, senior product line manager for Juniper, whether it's from the LAN or remote users.

Each vendor also offered a glimpse at what their NAC products would look like 18 months from now: Cisco's Rice said increased speed and more diverse form factors will make NAC more cost-effective.

Juniper's Krishnan said there will be more "use cases" for NAC: "Not all users will roll NAC across their network." Some may be focusing on securing a specific application, he said. "And devices will be coordinating with each other, with greater visibility among each other."

Microsoft's Mayfield said multivendor integration will increase. "And you'll see more emergence of higher-level policies to bring those things together. XP SP3 is going to help."

McAfee's Solanki said more user-defined policies will be on tap.

— Kelly Jackson Higgins, Senior Editor, Dark Reading

  • Cisco Systems Inc. (Nasdaq: CSCO)
  • Juniper Networks Inc. (Nasdaq: JNPR)
  • Microsoft Corp. (Nasdaq: MSFT)
  • McAfee Inc. (NYSE: MFE)
  • Trusted Computing Group Kelly Jackson Higgins is the Executive Editor of Dark Reading. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio
     

    Recommended Reading:

    Comment  | 
    Print  | 
    More Insights
  • Comments
    Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
    COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
    Dark Reading Staff 6/5/2020
    Abandoned Apps May Pose Security Risk to Mobile Devices
    Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  5/29/2020
    How AI and Automation Can Help Bridge the Cybersecurity Talent Gap
    Peter Barker, Chief Product Officer at ForgeRock,  6/1/2020
    Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
    White Papers
    Video
    Cartoon Contest
    Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
    Latest Comment: What? IT said I needed virus protection!
    Current Issue
    How Cybersecurity Incident Response Programs Work (and Why Some Don't)
    This Tech Digest takes a look at the vital role cybersecurity incident response (IR) plays in managing cyber-risk within organizations. Download the Tech Digest today to find out how well-planned IR programs can detect intrusions, contain breaches, and help an organization restore normal operations.
    Flash Poll
    Twitter Feed
    Dark Reading - Bug Report
    Bug Report
    Enterprise Vulnerabilities
    From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
    CVE-2020-13842
    PUBLISHED: 2020-06-05
    An issue was discovered on LG mobile devices with Android OS 7.2, 8.0, 8.1, 9, and 10 (MTK chipsets). A dangerous AT command was made available even though it is unused. The LG ID is LVE-SMP-200010 (June 2020).
    CVE-2020-13843
    PUBLISHED: 2020-06-05
    An issue was discovered on LG mobile devices with Android OS software before 2020-06-01. Local users can cause a denial of service because checking of the userdata partition is mishandled. The LG ID is LVE-SMP-200014 (June 2020).
    CVE-2020-13839
    PUBLISHED: 2020-06-05
    An issue was discovered on LG mobile devices with Android OS 7.2, 8.0, 8.1, 9, and 10 (MTK chipsets). Code execution can occur via a custom AT command handler buffer overflow. The LG ID is LVE-SMP-200007 (June 2020).
    CVE-2020-13840
    PUBLISHED: 2020-06-05
    An issue was discovered on LG mobile devices with Android OS 7.2, 8.0, 8.1, 9, and 10 (MTK chipsets). Code execution can occur via an MTK AT command handler buffer overflow. The LG ID is LVE-SMP-200008 (June 2020).
    CVE-2020-13841
    PUBLISHED: 2020-06-05
    An issue was discovered on LG mobile devices with Android OS 9 and 10 (MTK chipsets). An AT command handler allows attackers to bypass intended access restrictions. The LG ID is LVE-SMP-200009 (June 2020).