Service Provider vs. Enterprise Security – Is There a Difference?

Prior to addressing my thoughts on the security question, I’d like to ask a question, which one might think is rhetorical: “Is there a difference between a service provider (SP) and an enterprise network?” Note that in this blog, my reference to an “enterprise” means a large enterprise as opposed to an SMB.

Both SP and enterprise networks provide communication services to their respective employees. Both have applications running through their networks. But where the a fundamental difference lies is in the fact that an SP’s network provides communication services not only to its own employees, but also to its customers, acting as a transit pipe carrying various types of traffic.

Saying that, there are enterprises providing similar “transitive” services for their customers, but the distinction is that SPs make their revenues based on access and services, while enterprises focus on services. SP infrastructures are built to offer fast and reliable access via large transit pipes to provide various types of communication services. Enterprise infrastructures, on the other hand, are built to offer intra-company connectivity to their employees and services to their customers.

So as to the security question, one might think that SP and enterprise security requirements are similar. Both need to protect their respective core infrastructures and data centers. And sure, SP and large enterprise data centers do have a lot in common. In fact, one could claim that security requirements are very similar, if not the same. From the core infrastructure perspective—putting aside specifics of certain protocols for mobile operators, like SCTP and GTP—one could also claim that the basic requirements are similar, if not the same between an SP and a large enterprise.

However, one of the major differences between SP and enterprise networks is the type of traffic that traverses each. SP infrastructures are traversed by their customers’ transit traffic, while enterprise infrastructures are traversed only by their own traffic. That’s where I see the majority of confusion, differences, and challenges arising from a security perspective.

SPs, not wanting to act as a “dumb pipe,” aim to provide value-add services, such as the ability to offer “clean” traffic to their customers. Hence, SPs are interested in incorporating various security intelligence elements into their infrastructures that would allow them to offer customer traffic protection—as well as increase their respective ARPU. These services range from DDoS to IDP, from IPSec VPNs to antivirus.  SPs need to be able to differentiate between various customers and corresponding security services for each one.

Those are my high-level thoughts on delineating SP and enterprise security needs. What about yours?

SPs, interested to increase ARPU, are challenged with scaling factors. That, of course, leads us to the cloud and SDN—two topics which I’ll be discussing in a forthcoming blog.

View the original article here

Read More

There Is No Safer Football Helmet for Kids: Study

Researchers compared high-tech helmets to standard gear for concussion protection

By Dennis Thompson

HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, Oct. 28 (HealthDay News) -- High-tech helmets and custom mouth guards do not reduce concussion risk for high school football players any more effectively than low-cost helmets or off-the-shelf mouth guards, a new study says.

Neither specific brands nor higher-cost protective gear resulted in fewer concussions among more than 1,300 football players at 36 high schools during the 2012 season, according to a study scheduled for presentation Monday at an American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) meeting in Orlando, Fla.

"We're certainly not saying that helmets and mouth guards aren't important. They do what they are supposed to do. Mouth guards prevent dental injuries, and helmets prevent skull fractures and scalp and face lacerations," said Dr. Margaret Alison Brooks, the study's lead co-investigator. "But I don't think the manufacturing companies have the data to support [the claim that] if a parent buys a specific model, their child will have a reduced risk of concussion."

About 40,000 sports-related concussions occur in United States high schools every year, the researchers said.

Many manufacturers of football helmets and mouth guards cite laboratory research that their pricey equipment will better cushion impact and reduce players' risk of concussion, said Brooks, an assistant professor of orthopedics and rehabilitation at the University of Wisconsin.

"We were interested in whether we can support the manufacturer claims that more expensive, newer, fancier football helmets really reduce the risk of concussion," she said.

Players involved in the study completed a preseason questionnaire listing their personal statistics and previous injuries. Athletic trainers took notes on all concussions that occurred throughout the year.

The players wore helmets manufactured by three companies: Riddell (52 percent), Schutt (35 percent) and Xenith (13 percent). About 75 percent of helmets were relatively new, having been purchased since 2009.

The study also noted which mouth guards players wore. About 60 percent of players wore generic models provided by schools, while the rest wore models custom-fitted by dental professionals or specifically marketed to reduce the risk of concussions.

During the 2012 season, 115 players sustained a concussion -- about 8.5 percent of all players in the study, the researchers said.

The concussion rate did not vary among players based on the type of helmet worn or the age of the helmet. The helmet brand also made no difference in the severity of concussions, which was measured by the number of days lost from play due to concussion.

"As long as the helmet their child is wearing is in good condition, is properly fit and is worn correctly, then the parent shouldn't feel bad if their child is not in a $400 or $500 helmet," Brooks said.

Players with custom-fitted mouth guards actually suffered a higher concussion rate than those who used generic models.

View the original article here

Read More