VPN Client Security

[Dan]

You had better make mine 147 bit ---- Thanks for your comment, From the
Rafters and I do appreciate it.

The real or should I say reel (movie) deal is that b_nice is too serious
about security and needs to relax. I used to be like b_nice and not be able
to relax but now computer security and safety is just all a game to me. You
people should be really thankful that I am a good hacker and not a bad one
because I could really wreck havoc if I so wanted to but I obey the law and I
guess that just is not appreciated that I don't fit into the box method of
your usual security person because I am not. I have used computers since
before 1984 with an IBM PCjr and began BASIC programming with a BASIC
cartridge and have worked with computers ever since so no I am not some
newbie and I even plan on getting my A+ certification this year so there go
ahead and continue the mockery, Paul and b_nice. BTW, I am justified in
being rude to b_nice because b_nice is a total jerk and wound up so tight
that the b_nice only cares about security and is not willing to talk about
anything else. We all need to lighten up the mood folks and kick back and
relax and remember it is Saturday and a Labor Day weekend to boot. Finally,
Paul does know what he is talking about and is recognized with the mvp status
by Microsoft but I have no desire to meet him in person either. I will tell
you folks there are a lot of nice mvps out there and they are Robear Dyer,
mvp, Chris Quirke, mvp, Alan Edwards, mvp, etc. and these nice folks usually
hang out in the Windows 98 general newsgroup where the mood is much lighter
than here.

"FromTheRafters" wrote:

>
> "Dan" <Dan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:4C0BE077-BAD2-4A32-8349-1E31C3ECB825@microsoft.com...
> > So using a multi-layered security and safety approach is good. BTW, why
> > do
> > we still only use 128 bit cipher strength so frequently and why not
> > upgrade
> > the entire industry to start using 168 bit cipher strength as a new bare
> > minimum.
>
> I want to use 129 bits - gee...nearly twice strength of the
> 128 bit version and I only buy one more bit. )
>
>
>

 

[Dan]

I am saying have keys expire much more frequently so they can be updated more
and this would lesson the chance that the key could be stolen or compromised.
The security certificate is what I am referring to.

"Paul Adare - MVP" wrote:

> On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 03:38:01 -0700, Dan wrote:
>
> > Why not require all keys to be updated more frequently and if the
> > corresponding key is lost then the user has no access === period?
>
> What in the world are you talking about? This makes no sense.
>
> > I ran into
> > an expired key recently at boards.live.microsoft.com and wondered to myself
> > why Microsoft had not updated the key. I emailed Microsoft and got the
> > response --- oh, that is a msn problem so you need to contact them -- contact
> > them -- nope it is not our problem and you need to contact Microsoft --- this
> > shifting of responsibility is stupid because no one wants to own up and be a
> > man or woman and say this is a problem that needs to be remedied and I if
> > they do indeed have the skills then let them say that I have the skills so I
> > can take action with the proper approval and fix the problem and then it is
> > no longer a problem
>
> You can't even distinguish between a pre-shared key and certificate and you
> expect anyone to take you seriously when it comes to your whacked out views
> on what constitutes computer security? Man, I feel sorry for whomever is
> employing you if your job involves anything at all to do with computer
> security.
>
> --
> Paul Adare
> MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager
> http://www.identit.ca
> A computer program does what you tell it to do, not what you want it to do.
>

 

[Brian Komar \(MVP\)]

You are making absolutely no sense.
Please learn some basics about PKI before posting on this topic

Thanks,
Brian

"Dan" <Dan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6DD213CF-A89D-4B3F-ABC6-37EB9E4B833E@microsoft.com...
>I am saying have keys expire much more frequently so they can be updated
>more
> and this would lesson the chance that the key could be stolen or
> compromised.
> The security certificate is what I am referring to.
>
> "Paul Adare - MVP" wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 03:38:01 -0700, Dan wrote:
>>
>> > Why not require all keys to be updated more frequently and if the
>> > corresponding key is lost then the user has no access === period?
>>
>> What in the world are you talking about? This makes no sense.
>>
>> > I ran into
>> > an expired key recently at boards.live.microsoft.com and wondered to
>> > myself
>> > why Microsoft had not updated the key. I emailed Microsoft and got the
>> > response --- oh, that is a msn problem so you need to contact them --
>> > contact
>> > them -- nope it is not our problem and you need to contact
>> > Microsoft --- this
>> > shifting of responsibility is stupid because no one wants to own up and
>> > be a
>> > man or woman and say this is a problem that needs to be remedied and I
>> > if
>> > they do indeed have the skills then let them say that I have the skills
>> > so I
>> > can take action with the proper approval and fix the problem and then
>> > it is
>> > no longer a problem
>>
>> You can't even distinguish between a pre-shared key and certificate and
>> you
>> expect anyone to take you seriously when it comes to your whacked out
>> views
>> on what constitutes computer security? Man, I feel sorry for whomever is
>> employing you if your job involves anything at all to do with computer
>> security.
>>
>> --
>> Paul Adare
>> MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager
>> http://www.identit.ca
>> A computer program does what you tell it to do, not what you want it to
>> do.
>>

 

[~BD~]

He made a typo, Dan! "There is no suck reliance"

Dave

--.
"Dan" <Dan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CD68B3DB-C45F-4AC9-BF2F-3AAAF76582C1@microsoft.com...
> What are you trying to say Paul?
>
> "Paul Adare - MVP" wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 05:21:16 -0400, Paul Adare - MVP wrote:
>>
>> > suck
>>
>> such
>> --
>> Paul Adare
>> MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager
>> http://www.identit.ca
>> HOST SYSTEM NOT RESPONDING, PROBABLY DOWN. DO YOU WANT TO WAIT? (Y/N)
>>
>

 

[Paul Adare - MVP]

On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 08:55:01 -0700, Dan wrote:

> You
> people should be really thankful that I am a good hacker and not a bad one
> because I could really wreck havoc if I so wanted

Most hilarious thing I've read here for ages.

--
Paul Adare
MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager
http://www.identit.ca
The attention span of a computer is only as long as its power cord.

 

[Root Kit]

On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 08:55:01 -0700, Dan
<Dan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>The real or should I say reel (movie) deal is that b_nice is too serious
>about security and needs to relax.

How you can turn a thread about VPN (a thread I did not even
participate in) into a personal attack on me proves what others have
already suggested: You are mentally unbalanced.

> I used to be like b_nice

You were never like me.

>and not be able to relax but now computer security and safety is just all a game to me.

Finally some truth from you. Everyone can see you're just playing
around.

>You people should be really thankful that I am a good hacker and not a bad one
>because I could really wreck havoc if I so wanted

BWA HA HA HA HA. I guess you're right. Just leaving you with a
keyboard is dangerous.

>I have used computers since before 1984 with an IBM PCjr and began BASIC
>programming with a BASIC cartridge and have worked with computers ever since so
>no I am not some newbie and I even plan on getting my A+ certification this year
>so there go ahead and continue the mockery, Paul and b_nice.

I will for sure continue the mockery as long as you keep on posting
stuff which shows you have no clue what you are talking about. Your
credentials means nothing when what you post is complete nonsense.

>BTW, I am justified in being rude to b_nice because b_nice is a total jerk and wound up so tight
>that the b_nice only cares about security and is not willing to talk about
>anything else.

Of course I'm not willing to talk about anything else. It's called
staying on topic. Something which you seem to have a serious problem
with.

>We all need to lighten up the mood folks and kick back and
>relax and remember it is Saturday and a Labor Day weekend to boot.

No we don't. You, on the other hand, need to remember to get your
medication.

>Finally, Paul does know what he is talking about and is recognized with the mvp status
>by Microsoft but I have no desire to meet him in person either. I will tell
>you folks there are a lot of nice mvps out there and they are Robear Dyer,
>mvp, Chris Quirke, mvp, Alan Edwards, mvp, etc. and these nice folks usually
>hang out in the Windows 98 general newsgroup where the mood is much lighter
>than here.

Then go there instead.

 

[Dan]

Sorry, Brian and Paul and et. all and I will try to be more clear and concise
in the future.

"Brian Komar (MVP)" wrote:

> You are making absolutely no sense.
> Please learn some basics about PKI before posting on this topic
>
> Thanks,
> Brian
>
> "Dan" <Dan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:6DD213CF-A89D-4B3F-ABC6-37EB9E4B833E@microsoft.com...
> >I am saying have keys expire much more frequently so they can be updated
> >more
> > and this would lesson the chance that the key could be stolen or
> > compromised.
> > The security certificate is what I am referring to.
> >
> > "Paul Adare - MVP" wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 03:38:01 -0700, Dan wrote:
> >>
> >> > Why not require all keys to be updated more frequently and if the
> >> > corresponding key is lost then the user has no access === period?
> >>
> >> What in the world are you talking about? This makes no sense.
> >>
> >> > I ran into
> >> > an expired key recently at boards.live.microsoft.com and wondered to
> >> > myself
> >> > why Microsoft had not updated the key. I emailed Microsoft and got the
> >> > response --- oh, that is a msn problem so you need to contact them --
> >> > contact
> >> > them -- nope it is not our problem and you need to contact
> >> > Microsoft --- this
> >> > shifting of responsibility is stupid because no one wants to own up and
> >> > be a
> >> > man or woman and say this is a problem that needs to be remedied and I
> >> > if
> >> > they do indeed have the skills then let them say that I have the skills
> >> > so I
> >> > can take action with the proper approval and fix the problem and then
> >> > it is
> >> > no longer a problem
> >>
> >> You can't even distinguish between a pre-shared key and certificate and
> >> you
> >> expect anyone to take you seriously when it comes to your whacked out
> >> views
> >> on what constitutes computer security? Man, I feel sorry for whomever is
> >> employing you if your job involves anything at all to do with computer
> >> security.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Paul Adare
> >> MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager
> >> http://www.identit.ca
> >> A computer program does what you tell it to do, not what you want it to
> >> do.
> >>
>