Re: Terminal services by Mark
Mark
Thu May 20 21:35:26 CDT 2004
Steve, how could a connection that allows viruses and worms through be MORE
secure than one that doesn't/. SBC is more secure than any VPN.
--
Sincerely,
Mark Mancini, CCA, CCNA, Master CIW&CI, CNE 4&5, MCSE+I 4&2000
www.MCSE2000.com
www.AppLauncher.com
"Steve Foster [SBS MVP]" <steve.foster@picamar.co.uk> wrote in message
news:xn0dihgni4moy1001s@msnews.microsoft.com...
> Mark Mancini wrote:
>
> > STeve, no, you DON'T need a VPN to add security to TS.....it will only
> > REDUCE it. TS should be setup with high encryption for 128 bit
> > encryption. He is using it for admin purposes, and shouldn't need
> > access to LAN resources. While he is an admin, he maybe accessing it
> > from his family computer and putting a PC on a company LAN like that
> > is LESS secure than SBC.
>
> The default configuration for a VPN connection is more secure than
> direct TS, and offers much more functionality.
>
> The default for TS is to not lock out administrator accounts, no matter
> how many attempt to logon, whereas with a VPN it's easy to have a
> separate account just for the VPN tunnel.
>
> I know it's possible to make changes to mitigate against these, but
> those are not the default settings, and the maximum security with
> default settings will come from the use of VPN rather than direct TS.
>
> Who's to say the original poster doesn't need remote access to LAN
> resources... When I'm doing remote administrative tasks for my
> customers, I often have a need to reach out to the internal network.
>
> --
> Steve Foster [SBS MVP]
> ---------------------------------------
> MVPs do not work for Microsoft. Please reply only to the newsgroups.