<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Dr. Johannes Ullrich and the Principle of Least Priviledge</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.infosecblog.org/2012/08/dr-johannes-ullrich-and-the-principle-of-least-priviledge/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.infosecblog.org/2012/08/dr-johannes-ullrich-and-the-principle-of-least-priviledge/</link>
	<description>Since 2004, a source for ranting, reviews and InfoSec news</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 20:26:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roger</title>
		<link>http://www.infosecblog.org/2012/08/dr-johannes-ullrich-and-the-principle-of-least-priviledge/#comment-194732</link>
		<dc:creator>Roger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2012 22:00:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.infosecblog.org/?p=6067#comment-194732</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I stand by the title.  I think that you painted all of us in IT Security with a broad &quot;slumlord&quot; brush.  Not just specific types of people but anyone who would examine the risks involved with new technology, and even block it until its proven secure.  

With friends like these...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I stand by the title.  I think that you painted all of us in IT Security with a broad &#8220;slumlord&#8221; brush.  Not just specific types of people but anyone who would examine the risks involved with new technology, and even block it until its proven secure.  </p>
<p>With friends like these&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roger</title>
		<link>http://www.infosecblog.org/2012/08/dr-johannes-ullrich-and-the-principle-of-least-priviledge/#comment-193485</link>
		<dc:creator>Roger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2012 03:56:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.infosecblog.org/?p=6067#comment-193485</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Normally, I&#039;m pretty good about releasing comment moderation.   The spam filter snagged my comment notification for some reason.   And I didn&#039;t have much to blog about this week so I didn&#039;t see the comment in queue until now.   Sorry for the delay.

Thanks for the read.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Normally, I&#8217;m pretty good about releasing comment moderation.   The spam filter snagged my comment notification for some reason.   And I didn&#8217;t have much to blog about this week so I didn&#8217;t see the comment in queue until now.   Sorry for the delay.</p>
<p>Thanks for the read.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Johannes Ullrich</title>
		<link>http://www.infosecblog.org/2012/08/dr-johannes-ullrich-and-the-principle-of-least-priviledge/#comment-192871</link>
		<dc:creator>Johannes Ullrich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2012 15:55:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.infosecblog.org/?p=6067#comment-192871</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Do you feel the death mind ray ;-)

I think you may have take the title a bit wrong, but your response does hit on some of the points I am trying to make. What it comes down to in the end is that user &quot;buy in&quot; is critical to make security work. If you are the security guy who always says &quot;no&quot;, you will fail, because users will work against you. The important part is to find the right balance, and I run into too many security people that say &quot;no&quot; first, just out of habit. If you don&#039;t behave like a slumlord, then your users (tenants) will be able to pay a bit more and you tend to attract better users (tenants). Of course, there will be businesses that are very &quot;focused&quot; (thinking here about call centers) or have high security requirements (state secrets). But from a network security point of view, I actually find them less interesting then lets say an R&amp;D department (difficult recruiting great people, lots of sensitive stuff to protect, tends to have creative/technical individuals).

a try a tinfoil beanie against the mind control  death rays  ;-)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you feel the death mind ray <img src='http://www.infosecblog.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>I think you may have take the title a bit wrong, but your response does hit on some of the points I am trying to make. What it comes down to in the end is that user &#8220;buy in&#8221; is critical to make security work. If you are the security guy who always says &#8220;no&#8221;, you will fail, because users will work against you. The important part is to find the right balance, and I run into too many security people that say &#8220;no&#8221; first, just out of habit. If you don&#8217;t behave like a slumlord, then your users (tenants) will be able to pay a bit more and you tend to attract better users (tenants). Of course, there will be businesses that are very &#8220;focused&#8221; (thinking here about call centers) or have high security requirements (state secrets). But from a network security point of view, I actually find them less interesting then lets say an R&amp;D department (difficult recruiting great people, lots of sensitive stuff to protect, tends to have creative/technical individuals).</p>
<p>a try a tinfoil beanie against the mind control  death rays  <img src='http://www.infosecblog.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
