Comments on: Why Computerworld.au is dead wrong about “Enterprises must avoid IP telephony for teleworkers or face attack” http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/03/05/why-computerworldau-is-dead-wrong-about-enterprises-must-avoid-ip-telephony-for-teleworkers-or-face-attack/ Collective thoughts and musings on the state of VoIP security today. Fri, 18 May 2012 10:08:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: David Endler http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/03/05/why-computerworldau-is-dead-wrong-about-enterprises-must-avoid-ip-telephony-for-teleworkers-or-face-attack/comment-page-1/#comment-28814 David Endler Thu, 08 Mar 2007 21:20:36 +0000 http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/03/05/why-computerworldau-is-dead-wrong-about-enterprises-must-avoid-ip-telephony-for-teleworkers-or-face-attack/#comment-28814 Yikes, I'm just now catching up from email after VoiceCon and finally had a chance to read the ComputerWorld article. I didn't realize until now that I had been quoted in it. Mark Collier and I presented a 3 hour tutorial on VoIP security this Monday at VoiceCon where I think the reporter grabbed all of those quotes from. It's unfortunate that the reporter took about 15 minutes worth of our presentation and used it to further his faulty premise. Our presentation outlined certain threats to general VoIP installations, and then detailed the specific countermeasures that could be applied to mitigate each threat. Mark and I stated several times throughout our presentation that even though there are security concerns associated with deploying VoIP (as with any application), all of the enterprise class VoIP solutions that we had tested are securable with the right amount of effort and research. It's a shame that point didn't get included in the article. Dan, you are spot on with your rebuttal. Having been in the security industry for a while, I'm not as surprised anymore at fear based reporting. It's just a little more upsetting when it's your own words being taken out of context to sex up a headline. My hope is that as VOIPSA grows as a voice piece in this industry, we can continue to combat this type of FUD with our projects, guidelines, and outreach messaging. Yikes, I’m just now catching up from email after VoiceCon and finally had a chance to read the ComputerWorld article. I didn’t realize until now that I had been quoted in it.

Mark Collier and I presented a 3 hour tutorial on VoIP security this Monday at VoiceCon where I think the reporter grabbed all of those quotes from. It’s unfortunate that the reporter took about 15 minutes worth of our presentation and used it to further his faulty premise. Our presentation outlined certain threats to general VoIP installations, and then detailed the specific countermeasures that could be applied to mitigate each threat. Mark and I stated several times throughout our presentation that even though there are security concerns associated with deploying VoIP (as with any application), all of the enterprise class VoIP solutions that we had tested are securable with the right amount of effort and research. It’s a shame that point didn’t get included in the article.

Dan, you are spot on with your rebuttal. Having been in the security industry for a while, I’m not as surprised anymore at fear based reporting. It’s just a little more upsetting when it’s your own words being taken out of context to sex up a headline.

My hope is that as VOIPSA grows as a voice piece in this industry, we can continue to combat this type of FUD with our projects, guidelines, and outreach messaging.

]]>