B
Bruce Chambers
Unknown wrote:
> Now YOU are showing your stupidity.
OK, I'll try dropping down to your level for a second: "I know you
are, but what am I?" Did I hit the right age group? Was that something
you're capable of understanding?
> There is no need to check outgoing if
> you don't allow incoming Viruses, Trojans etc.
And you're able to guarantee 100% that everyone, yourself included, is
100% capable of ensuring that 100% of all malware is blocked? How much
money are you willing to put behind that assertion? The whole point
behind monitoring out-bound traffic is to let one know that something
slipped by one's other safeguards. Will it be 100% effective? No. But
it's certainly better than nothing.
> How many posters were told to shut down outgoing scanning?
None, that I've ever seen, unless one counts trolls such as yourself
who are deliberately passing out destructive advice.
> How many posters
> have problems due to output scanning.
With a properly configured firewall? None, whatsoever.
> Are you deaf and dumb?
No, nor do I see what speech and/or hearing impediments could possibly
have to do with this discussion.
As you've been completely unable to offer any facts or rational
arguments to support your assertions, I suggest you give it up and
refrain from embarrassing yourself further.
--
Bruce Chambers
Help us help you:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin
Many people would rather die than think in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell
The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot
> Now YOU are showing your stupidity.
OK, I'll try dropping down to your level for a second: "I know you
are, but what am I?" Did I hit the right age group? Was that something
you're capable of understanding?
> There is no need to check outgoing if
> you don't allow incoming Viruses, Trojans etc.
And you're able to guarantee 100% that everyone, yourself included, is
100% capable of ensuring that 100% of all malware is blocked? How much
money are you willing to put behind that assertion? The whole point
behind monitoring out-bound traffic is to let one know that something
slipped by one's other safeguards. Will it be 100% effective? No. But
it's certainly better than nothing.
> How many posters were told to shut down outgoing scanning?
None, that I've ever seen, unless one counts trolls such as yourself
who are deliberately passing out destructive advice.
> How many posters
> have problems due to output scanning.
With a properly configured firewall? None, whatsoever.
> Are you deaf and dumb?
No, nor do I see what speech and/or hearing impediments could possibly
have to do with this discussion.
As you've been completely unable to offer any facts or rational
arguments to support your assertions, I suggest you give it up and
refrain from embarrassing yourself further.
--
Bruce Chambers
Help us help you:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin
Many people would rather die than think in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell
The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot