On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon@cox.net> wrote:
On 4/30/2014 11:30 AM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
And in that discussion, we ascertained that what the PCI standard actually says, and what you need to do in order to get unclued boneheaded auditors to sign the piece of paper, are two very different things.
I am no longer active on the battlefield but as of the last time I was, it can't be did.
For years I managed various aspect of a UNIVAC 1100 operation and the audits thereof. EVERY TIME, we were dinged badly because we didn't look like an IBM shop (some may be surprised to learn that different hardware and different operating systems require very different operating procedures (and it appeared to us that some of the things they wanted us to do would weaken us badly, others just simply didn't make any sense, and we got dinged for things we DID do, because they were strange.
I won the argument with PCI auditors about leaving telnet alive on my exterior router (which at the time would have had to be replaced to support ssh). It's not a chore for the timid. You'd better be a heck of a guru before you challenge the auditors expectations and you'd better be prepared for your boss' aggravation that the audit isn't done yet. And I think we pretty well established that PCI auditors arrive expecting to see NAT. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004