|
Posted by TechGrrl on June 22, 2006, 5:12 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
improved quite a bit - they do support port ranges in rules as well as
other advanced security features. These boxes needed time to mature and
now they do provide just about all the security a small business
network needs.
David, if you have any specific questions about features - write them
here and I am sure the experts will be able to recommend the best
firewall for your needs for the best price.
OCR wrote:
> Hello,
>
> out of experience, having worked for a Checkpoint Platinum Reseller, I
> would not recommend either.
> They have very basic Firewalling functionality I am afraid.
> The policy editor is basic to say the least (although when managed from
> a smartcenter server, you get more or less the same interface as for
> checkpoint firewall, albeit with some limitations such as no support
> for ip-ranges).
>
> I have had instances of customer having been sold these in a similar
> capacity as you describe with headaches for all involved.
>
> They are meant as gateways for satellite offices, in conjunction with a
> more advanced checkpoint infrastructure.
>
> I would advise obtaining a quote for a Nokia IP130. That is at least a
> fully featured firewall .
>
> Mail me if you have any further queries.
>
> cheers
>
> ocr
>
> dwhite10701 wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I was hoping I could get some good advice here.
> >
> > My company is looking into buying a firewall appliance. We're a small
> > office, with a staff from 15-20 people. We have one server and 19
> > computers on our network. We'd like to find an appliance that would
> > secure that network and allow staff members to access the network
> > remotely.
> >
> > The re-seller is pushing the Checkpoint VPN-1 Edge X, which, along with
> > the SmartDefense service, would cost us around $2200. But the
> > Safe@Office appliance seems that it would work for us just as well, at
> > a much cheaper price. The re-seller says the Safe@Office box is
> > designed mainly for wireless users, but I don't see any info online
> > that backs that up.
> >
> > So do you think there is a good reason for us to go with the Edge box
> > over the Safe@Office box?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > David
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML site map