- Smartphone smackdown: Storm vs. iPhone
- Cisco fights to keep No. 1 spot
- 10 IT security companies to watch
- Researchers take a step in quantum computing
- Making the Wi-Fi connection
Senior Editor Tim Greene clarifies issues surrounding the evolving NAC security architecture.
A Sophos survey finds that 39% of corporate computers scanned by the company flunked a basic NAC compliance test.
The online scan that was advertised to IT professionals generated 583 assessments worldwide between April 29 and June 7.
Visitors to the site would fill out a demographic survey and download a NAC scanning Java Script that checked out their machine. The scan looked for operating system patches; secure Internet Explorer browser configurations; and security patches for Microsoft Office, Media Player and Flash Player (Compare Patch and Vulnerability Management products).
It also checked whether the devices had antivirus software installed (Compare antivirus products), turned on and updated to the most recent release. And it looked for a personal firewall installed and turned on.
If any one of these parameters was not met, the device flunked.
Worldwide, the most common shortcoming was missing security patches, with 63% missing them. Firewalls came in second, with 47% of them installed but turned off. Just 5% of antivirus software was installed but turned off, and another 10% had the antivirus turned on but not up to date.
Sophos acknowledges that the machines tested were likely IT professionals, but says these results are similar to what Sophos gets when it runs scans on all the endpoints in customer networks as part of its QuickScan service.
This also falls in line with anecdotal accounts from businesses that install NAC without knowing ahead of time how compliant their machines are. Some have reported more than 60% of their machines flunking. That’s the reason it pays to install NAC gear in monitoring mode before turning it on so all those machines that would otherwise be rejected can be fixed before the NAC rules are enforced.
The Sophos test is ongoing and can be found here.
Tim Greene is senior editor at Network World.
Rss FeedRss Feed
| NetworkWorld, Inc. | About Network World, Inc. | Advertise | Careers | Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy | Reprints and links | Partnerships | Press room | Subscribe to NW |
| IDG, Inc. | CIO | Computerworld | CSO | Demo | GamePro | Games.net | IDGconnect.com | IDG World Expo | Infoworld | JavaWorld.com | LinuxWorld.com | MacUser | Macworld | PC World | Playlistmag.com | The Industry Standard | IDG List Services | IDG TechNetwork |
 The Leader in Network Knowledge© 1994-2008 Network World, Inc. All rights reserved. |
Partner Content
Brilliantly simple security and control solutions for email, web and endpoint
www.sophos.com
Stopping data leakage
Learn how to exploit your current security investment to control the information that flows into, through and out of your network.
Download the white paper.
Why detection rates aren't enough
Evaluating endpoint security products is a time-consuming and daunting task. Learn the six critical questions you need to ask prospective vendors to get the right endpoint solution.
Download the white paper.
Applications: taking back control
Employees installing unauthorized applications is a growing threat to business security and productivity. Cost-effectively reduce this threat by integrating control into your malware protection.
Learn more today.
Comments (3)
sillyBy Anonymous on July 23, 2008, 2:03 pmThis test ignores hardware firewalls sitting right outside the computer being tested.
Reply | Read entire comment
Why don't you tell people that this security program does not ruBy Anonymous on July 22, 2008, 3:52 pmWhy don't you tell people that this security program does not run on Vista. You are wasting some peoples time.
Reply | Read entire comment
SophosBy Anonymous on June 17, 2008, 9:41 amI failed the NAC based on my firewall. While I have Sysgate Security agent installed and running the NAC test only found the windows firewall which is disabled....
Reply | Read entire comment
View all comments