Shimel took some exception to my thoughts on NAC (here), of course he sells a NAC product and I would have expected nothing less. From what I can tell Shimel agreed with everything I said, but yet he really didn’t want to. He noted that NAC was overpriced, overhyped, required infrastructure upgrades, wasn’t ready for primetime, would need to mature and evolve to deal with ID’s and new threats. Bascially he was saying, without realizing it, that people should really wait 2-3 years for NAC to mature before investing in the technology. I couldn’t agree more with you Shimel 
NAC vendor Defends NAC
February 20, 2007 by amritw
2 Responses
Leave a Reply
Twitter Feed- amrittsering: @wgragido I was just in Chicago, try to avoid that area during the winter months, but it's inevitable that winds of biz will drive me there December 9, 2009
- amrittsering: rt @mckeay Anyone else use internet radio station as early warning for network problems? <-- that's like using an elephant in a coal mine December 9, 2009
- amrittsering: ...it's the same thing you can never have if you do anything at all, anywhere, anytime that transfers a thought beyond your mind December 9, 2009
-
Top Posts
- The Great Depression
- AT&T U-Verse Universally Sucks!
- US Warned of China 'cyber-spying'
- Open Letter to Barack Obama: Securing Critical Infrastructure - The First 90 Days
- Hilarity Ensues: 10 Years of Tech Fail
- Note to Self: 2009 Holiday Gift List
- The Long IT Security Industry Winter
- The Constitution
- Hacking Store Credit Card Readers
- And on through the Fog of Microsoft's "Cloud OS" Azure
Archives
Tags
Meta
Of course a NAC vendor will defend NAC, they are constantly meeting customers, trying to create value in their products and have hands on knowledge of what NAC can really do.
NAC can offer value today, if you keep expectations and product costs within bounds.
Shimel didn’t really defend NAC, he does what he always does which is attack the messenger – those who have limited vocabularies resort to that type of thing.