RE: system security (was: symbolize roles)

["Jason Willebeek-LeMair \(jlemair\)" <jlemair -at- cisco -dot- com>]

> At any rate, security by secrecy is poor security. All it takes is 
> curiosity to break it...

True.  But there is a difference between security through obscurity and
simply not advertising.  For example, I don't broadcast my SSID on my
home wireless network. That keeps my network from showing up when folks
look to see what was out there. Is that what I rely on for security?
Heck no.  But it does keep the idle curious away.  If someone really
wanted to get on my network, they would have to work for it each step of
the way. Know that I have one (okay, you now know).  Break my
encryption. Discover my SSID. Get past the various other filters. Kick
one of my machines off so that the router will accept another
connection. Etc.  Make 'em work for it.

Just because security through obscurity is a bad idea does not mean you
have to reveal everything.  You just have to realize that concealing
capabilities is not the same as securing them.

Jason

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Now Shipping -- WebWorks ePublisher Pro for Word! Easily create online
Help. And online anything else. Redesigned interface with a new
project-based workflow. Try it today! http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l

Doc-To-Help 2005 now has RoboHelp Converter and HTML Source: Author
content and configure Help in MS Word or any HTML editor. No
proprietary editor! *August release. http://www.componentone.com/TECHWRL/DocToHelp2005

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.