<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.networkworld.com/community" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>McAfee</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034</link>
 <description>Showing new posts in a forum view</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>FDE drives should now be the default option</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/35097</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Noticed an interesting bit of news today: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.crn.com/storage/212001373&quot;&gt;Link&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;Basically, Seagate announced some new FDE drives, Dell is now OEM partner for the drives, and the new drives will include software from McAfee for the enterprise wide management of laptops.  Hold on... so basically McAfee&amp;#39;s takeover of Safeboot was not to gain a leg up on the software based FDE market.  Instead, they only wanted Safeboot so that they could use/extend their management software to manage an HFDE solution.  :&amp;gt;) &lt;span class=&#039;read-more&#039;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/35097&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Read more&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/35097#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/123">Microsoft</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/14145">FDE</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034">McAfee</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/17608">Safeboot</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/573">Seagate</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 08:41:09 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>tkopczynski</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">35097 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Cisco pitches square against Symantec, McAfee, and packet shaping vendors </title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/33426</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Cisco quietly made a couple of product releases recently that pitches it square against established &lt;img style=&quot;width: 75px; height: 71px&quot; src=&quot;/graphics/community/security-chains.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; width=&quot;75&quot; height=&quot;71&quot; align=&quot;right&quot; /&gt;competitors in the field, including Symantec and McAfee. Cisco&amp;#39;s Application Performance Assurance (APA) Network Module NME-APA-E3 2.0 adds Layer 7 packet shaping, while the latest version (6.0) of its Cisco Security Agent (CSA) adds an antivirus and data leakage prevention client. Cisco CSA security client runs on Windows, Linux, and Solaris - both servers and desktops. As for APA, Cisco claims APA can control more than 1,000 applications and report on its findings with 100-plus built-in reporting templates. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;According to Cisco security expert and Cisco Subnet blogger Jamey Heary, &amp;quot;CSA has never been able to capture that valuable desktop and server footprint like Mcafee, Symantec, etc. have. By moving CSA simultaneously into both the hot DLP market and the capital rich AV market Cisco hopes to change that.&amp;quot; &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Read more about &lt;a href=&quot;/community/node/33294&quot;&gt;APA&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;/community/node/32782&quot;&gt;CSA&lt;/a&gt; at Jamey Heary&amp;#39;s &lt;a href=&quot;/community/heary&quot;&gt;blog&lt;/a&gt;.   &lt;span class=&#039;read-more&#039;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/33426&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Read more&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/33426#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/47">Cisco</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/4641">Jamey Heary</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034">McAfee</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/16406">packet shaping</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/16500">security clients</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/798">Symantec</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2008 17:51:17 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Cisco Subnet</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">33426 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Secure Computing</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/33023</link>
 <description>Nice acquisition by McAfee. Technology that Gartner likes. Secure Computing does well in Gartner&#039;s Magic Quadrants (though   most companies  haven&#039;t fully read nor understand Gartner&#039;s own explanation as to how to &quot;use&quot; the Magic Quadrant documents).

Some instant gain in market share and traction into the enterprise. The overlap in the product lines - some reduction in models, most likely, but MFE will have to support the discontinued models for a few years anyway unless they implement a trade-in program.  MFE&#039;s channels will have to stop dissing Secure Computing&#039;s products. 

Regarding comments in the article about McAfee being a low cost provider. This may be true for some of their products, certainly not all. Companies like Barracuda and others may disagree!

Secure Computing&#039;s licensing programs - not an insurmountable problem. Security coopetition continues.</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/33023#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/16">Security</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034">McAfee</category>
 <pubDate>Mon, 22 Sep 2008 12:50:15 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>ckensek</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">33023 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>New suitor in Cisco mega acquisition rumor: McAfee</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/30889</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Despite Cisco CEO John Chambers telling investors that the company is &lt;a href=&quot;/community/node/30807&quot;&gt;not considering a mega &lt;img style=&quot;width: 88px; height: 58px&quot; src=&quot;/graphics/community/handshake.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; width=&quot;88&quot; height=&quot;58&quot; align=&quot;right&quot; /&gt;acquisition&lt;/a&gt; at the moment, the bloggers at Inorganic Growth are &lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.the451group.com/techdeals/security/whats-brewing-at-cisco/&quot;&gt;not buying it&lt;/a&gt; and is tossing a new name in the acquisition rumor mill: McAfee.  &lt;span class=&#039;read-more&#039;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/30889&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Read more&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/30889#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/47">Cisco</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1087">John Chambers</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034">McAfee</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/11347">Scott Weiss</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/58">security</category>
 <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 19:22:05 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Cisco Subnet</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">30889 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Juniper UAC+NAP, Is It Enough To Win NAC War?</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/30725</link>
 <description> &lt;p&gt;Network World writer Tim Greene has a &lt;a href=&quot;/newsletters/vpn/2008/080408nac1.html&quot;&gt;good  piece&lt;/a&gt; on Juniper&amp;#39;s announcement that it can now use the Microsoft NAP client  in place of Juniper&amp;#39;s own UAC client. That makes installations using Juniper&amp;#39;s  UAC for NAC easier to deploy since they don&amp;#39;t have to use the UAC client on  machines running Windows Vista and XP SP3. But this is a one-way announcement  when it comes to Microsoft NAP as it&amp;#39;s what enables NAC client machines to  participate in Juniper&amp;#39;s UAC solution (and Trusted Computing Group&amp;#39;s TNC  architecture), not the Microsoft-based NAC product solution. Microsoft has a  dual NAC strategy; expose the NAP client for 3rd party NAC solutions, and  deliver its own Microsoft-centric NAC solution. &lt;span class=&#039;read-more&#039;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/30725&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Read more&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/30725#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/29">Data Center</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1035">General discussions</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/123">Microsoft</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/21">Network Management</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/16">Security</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/17">Software</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/14394">Forefront Sterling beta</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/14395">Juniper UAC</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034">McAfee</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/11054">Microsoft Forefront</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/6947">Microsoft NAP</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/760">NAC</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/3531">network access control</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/9159">network access protection</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/798">Symantec</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/14396">Unified Access Control</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/14397">Universal Access Control</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 15:29:59 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Mitchell Ashley</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">30725 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Symantec &amp; McAfee Finally Get Run For Money</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/30488</link>
 <description>Microsoft &lt;a href=&quot;//?q=node/30474&quot;&gt;announced&lt;/a&gt; it&amp;#39;s  working with Sony of America and Toshiba Asia Pacific to pre-install Windows  OneCare on new PCs. I say yippee because I&amp;#39;m tried of uninstalling Symantec  slow-ware from new PCs. I long ago swore off Symantec&amp;#39;s products because of  their poor performance and how they slowed down (brought to a crawl in many  cases) my PCs. OneCare on the otherhand has been a pleasure to use. I&amp;#39;ve have  very little problems with OneCare and the performance hit is relatively marginal  compare to Symantec and McAfee. &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;ONECARE PLUSES&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;span class=&#039;read-more&#039;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/30488&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Read more&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/30488#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/33">E-commerce</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/123">Microsoft</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/21">Network Management</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/16">Security</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/30">SMB</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/17">Software</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/5974">anti-phishing</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/389">anti-virus</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034">McAfee</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/14233">Norton Anti-Virus</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1472">OneCare</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/11057">personal firewall</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/798">Symantec</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 03:32:38 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Mitchell Ashley</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">30488 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>new email system</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/29480</link>
 <description>I sounds to me like it is past time for a new email system that keeps this from happening.</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/29480#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/16">Security</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034">McAfee</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/74">spam</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 10:42:50 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator />
 <guid isPermaLink="false">29480 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>still mcafee rules</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/28689</link>
 <description>still mcafee rules</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/28689#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/16">Security</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034">McAfee</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/798">Symantec</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2008 04:51:18 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator />
 <guid isPermaLink="false">28689 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Interruping every five seconds</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/28432</link>
 <description>Mcafee interrupts my screen every five seconds or less to tell me to reinstall something I don&#039;t even have anymore.  Please stop it. I can&#039;t get any work done for that very reason.  I can understand why there are so many law suits in the world today. I have cancealed my business with you---and would like you to stay off my screen. joglremu@yahoo.com</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/28432#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/16">Security</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034">McAfee</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 17:29:53 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator />
 <guid isPermaLink="false">28432 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>confused</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/27212</link>
 <description>Is this about 1 Gbps or 10 Gbps. 
This reads more like an advertisement then a product announcement. </description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/27212#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/16">Security</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/227">firewalls</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034">McAfee</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:15:02 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator />
 <guid isPermaLink="false">27212 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>RE: McAfee warns over open source use</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/23645</link>
 <description>FUD</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/23645#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/16">Security</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/17">Software</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034">McAfee</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/260">open source</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2008 16:52:13 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator />
 <guid isPermaLink="false">23645 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>RE: McAfee announces security subscription service</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/17407</link>
 <description>I continue to receive popups from McAfee that my subscription has expired.   I renewed it using your email system at least two weeks ago.   Please straighten out the problem.

&lt;em&gt;Re: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.networkworld.com/news/2006/053006-mcafee-announces-security-subscription.html&quot;&gt;McAfee announces security subscription service&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/em&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/17407#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/16">Security</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034">McAfee</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2007 09:42:09 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator />
 <guid isPermaLink="false">17407 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Who stole Dave&#039;s notes?</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/15417</link>
 <description>&lt;p style=&quot;margin: 0in 0in 0pt&quot; class=&quot;MsoNormal&quot;&gt;&lt;font face=&quot;Times New Roman&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;At a dual Interop keynote, IBM Internet Security Service’s Tom Noonan spoke first, taunting the speaker who followed him, Dave DeWalt,&lt;span&gt;  &lt;/span&gt;the new CEO of McAfee.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;font face=&quot;Times New Roman&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt; &lt;/font&gt; &lt;p style=&quot;margin: 0in 0in 0pt&quot; class=&quot;MsoNormal&quot;&gt;&lt;font face=&quot;Times New Roman&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;Noonan knocked McAfee for trying to lure away IBM/ISS customers by offering free software if they switched to McAfee.&lt;/font&gt; &lt;span class=&#039;read-more&#039;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/15417&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Read more&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/15417#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/16">Security</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/231">IBM</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/716">Interop</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/2897">Interop 2007</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/3041">keynote</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034">McAfee</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2007 18:38:39 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Inbox</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">15417 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Cisco three time channel product of the year winner and tied as a fourth cowinner</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/14895</link>
 <description>The results are in for the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2125694,00.asp&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;eWEEK Channel Products of the Year Survey&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.

Cisco cleaned house winning 3 product categories and tying for a fourth.

&lt;b&gt;VoIP Offerings:&lt;/b&gt;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.eweek.com/slideshow_viewer/0,1205,l=&amp;s=26842&amp;a=206713&amp;po=26,00.asp&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.bradreese.com/images/year-voip.jpg&quot; width=&quot;460&quot; height=&quot;328&quot; border=&quot;0&quot; alt=&quot;Winner - VoIP Channel Product of the Year&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;b&gt;Security Appliances:&lt;/b&gt;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.eweek.com/slideshow_viewer/0,1205,l=&amp;s=26842&amp;a=206713&amp;po=18,00.asp&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.bradreese.com/images/year-sec-app.jpg&quot; width=&quot;460&quot; height=&quot;323&quot; border=&quot;0&quot; alt=&quot;Winner - Security Appliance Channel Product of the Year&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;b&gt;Network Infrastructure:&lt;/b&gt;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.eweek.com/slideshow_viewer/0,1205,l=&amp;s=26842&amp;a=206713&amp;po=13,00.asp&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.bradreese.com/images/year-net-infra.jpg&quot; width=&quot;460&quot; height=&quot;324&quot; border=&quot;0&quot; alt=&quot;Winner - Network Infrastructure Channel Product of the Year&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;b&gt;Network Security Software:&lt;/b&gt;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.eweek.com/slideshow_viewer/0,1205,l=&amp;s=26842&amp;a=206713&amp;po=14,00.asp&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.bradreese.com/images/year-net-sec.jpg&quot; width=&quot;460&quot; height=&quot;324&quot; border=&quot;0&quot; alt=&quot;Tied CoWinner - Network Security Software Channel Product of the Year&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;

Congratulations Cisco!

Especially for tying Symantec as CoWinner in the highly coveted &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.eweek.com/slideshow_viewer/0,1205,l=&amp;s=26842&amp;a=206713&amp;po=14,00.asp&quot;&gt;network security software category&lt;/a&gt;.

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.bradreese.com/brad-reese.htm&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.bradreese.com/images/brad-signature.gif&quot; width=&quot;111&quot; height=&quot;47&quot; border=&quot;0&quot; alt=&quot;Brad Reese Profile&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.BradReese.Com/&quot;&gt;http://www.BradReese.Com&lt;/a&gt; &lt;span class=&#039;read-more&#039;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/14895&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Read more&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/14895#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/47">Cisco</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/29">Data Center</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/22">LANs / WANs</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/16">Security</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/30">SMB</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/26">VoIP / Convergence</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/45">Wireless / Mobile</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/527">3Com</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1914">Adaptive Security Appliance</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1918">ASA</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1110">Avaya</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1591">Cisco Sytems</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/2773">CS-MARS</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1593">Juniper Networks</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/95">Linksys</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034">McAfee</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/2760">Microsoft</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/2777">Network Infrastructure</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/589">RSA</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/2778">Security Appliances</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/2775">SonicWall</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/61">Storage</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/798">Symantec</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/2774">Tivoli</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/2772">Unified Personal Communicator</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/220">VoIP</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/31">Wide Area Networks</category>
 <pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2007 02:04:03 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Brad Reese</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">14895 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>McAfee responds to spoofed threat</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/9114</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;bodytext&quot;&gt;McAfee has posted a blog response to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/9113&quot;&gt;&lt;u&gt;news this morning&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/a&gt; that a mass e-mailing of a password-stealing Trojan was spoofed so that it appears to have come from McAfee.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class=&quot;MsoNormal&quot;&gt;From &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.avertlabs.com/research/blog/?p=124&quot;&gt;&lt;u&gt;the McAfee post&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/a&gt;: &amp;quot;Some readers who did not follow the link to the description on the Kaspersky site clearly missed the statement &#039;Kaspersky Lab believes that McAfee is in no way involved in the distribution of this Trojan.&#039; As a result we started receiving questions like &amp;ldquo;Did you really?&amp;rdquo;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;(Update: As for whether anyone&#039;s fallen for the ruse, a McAfee spokesman says:&amp;nbsp;&amp;quot;Currently we are not aware of any affected customers who have contacted McAfee. We are certainly monitoring this closely.&amp;quot;)&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;span class=&#039;read-more&#039;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/9114&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Read more&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/9114#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/16">Security</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1034">McAfee</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 02 Nov 2006 13:04:52 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Paul McNamara</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">9114 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
