Re: Level 40 Security Verses Level 30

Ken,

Sims, Ken wrote:
> 
> Hi John -
> 
> >Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 14:20:07 -0800
> >From: John Earl <johnearl@400security.com>
> >Subject: Re: Level 40 Security Verses Level 30
>  ...
> >At level 40 some third
> >party software may have a problem (Hawkeye is the only one
> >that I've seen recently that uses these unsanctioned
> >interfaces, and even they have a work around for it).
> 
> It's interesting that I was looking at Hawkeye and level 40 earlier today.
> We are still on 30 and I'm thinking about 40.  If their documentation is
> correct, I wouldn't call it a "workaround", as that implies (at least to me)

You're right.

After re-reading my comments I realize that they could easily be
misconstrued as a criticizm of Hawkeye, and that was not my
intention.   Hawkeye gets high marks for addressing the problem in the
first place, and bonus points for their elegant solution (the
auto-detection element).  I also get a chuckle out of the message that
I've seen at level 40 stating that they "work much faster at Level
30".  :)  Hey, they're honest!


jte




--
John Earl                                          
johnearl@powertechgroup.com
The PowerTech Group                        206-575-0711
PowerLock Network Security              www.400security.com
The 400 School                                www.400school.com
--
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---