Mailbag: Cisco, Microsoft and security

Last week I noted that on the security front, Cisco is lined up on one side and Microsoft has managed to line up just about every other major networking hardware vendor on the other. You wrote in with your thoughts on this potential battle, and I’d like to share some of them here.

Last week I noted that on the security front, Cisco is lined up on one side and Microsoft has managed to line up just about every other major networking hardware vendor on the other (see editorial link below). You wrote in with your thoughts on this potential battle, and I’d like to share some of them here.

One thing that really stood out from the e-mail feedback is a much higher opinion among readers of Cisco’s ability to deliver products in general that of Microsoft’s.

Here’s a typical response:

“When deciding between Cisco’s NAC and Microsoft’s NAP, three questions come to mind.

“Who’s better at delivering a product that works the way it’s supposed to right off the bat? Who’s better at keeping their products stable through upgrades and changes? Who’s better at providing support for their products?

“Cisco, in my opinion, is the answer to all three of those questions. I don’t want something with a lot of holes in it protecting my network. I want something solid and dependable. As far as I’m concerned, Cisco is a lot more likely to deliver that than Microsoft is.”

Another reader takes a very network-centric view that implies that a coalition without Cisco isn’t much of a coalition at all:

“As a network manager my thoughts are that if your router, firewall and switch provider are not onboard, then Microsoft’s NAP doesn’t amount to anything. Not that it does anyway since they say right now that it will be late 2005 (read: mid-2006) for rollout.”

Other readers were downright suspicious of Microsoft:

“I somehow doubt that MS will be actively supporting ‘open and public’ standards in this and will use it as yet another tool for making anything that isn’t Microsoft (and up to date at that) as hard to use as they can. I may be cynical, but after three months of rolling out XP desktops without a Microsoft server I’m still finding out new ways they’ve found to make life difficult!”

One reader seems mildly hopeful that everyone can get along:

“It will be interesting to see what Cisco ends up doing regarding Microsoft’s NAP. There have been public inferences from Microsoft that they are in active discussions with Cisco to work together on client protection schemes. But, I have not read any official Cisco statements on the matter, and no further details were given.”

It seems to me the industry would be better off if everyone worked together on this – including and especially the top client software maker and the top network hardware vendor. Many thanks to all who wrote in.