General security usage question

permalink · #1 (**permalink**) 01-14-2008

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--===============0308336293==
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C856B1.4D9061E9"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C856B1.4D9061E9
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I've implemented the first round of our SNMP agents - we'll be
supporting get's only, along with traps; no set's will be supported for
the first release.

=20

We'll be allowing the user to configure the SNMP security through our UI
(which does NOT use SNMP), so we're hoping to keep it as simple as
possible. I've been testing with what I guess is called "v2" security -
where you have to list IP addresses of clients, put them in groups with
specific access, etc. (I haven't even attempted the "v3" stuff yet). But
management is wondering if we could make it even simpler for the
customer, and step back to "v1", which I guess is nothing more than a
community string and either "read" or "read/write" access.

=20

So my question is, is it "okay" to use the simplest security model (and
the least secure) if you're going to have view only data? Or are most
SNMP customers going to want a more secure model? Again, we aren't ready
to move to the latest and greatest yet (we want to have a better feel
for SNMP in general before we go down that path), so at best it would be
the "v2" stuff.

=20

Thanks!

=20

~ Wendy

------_=_NextPart_001_01C856B1.4D9061E9
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" =
xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" =
xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">

<head>
<meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<style>

</style>

</head>

<body lang=3DEN-US link=3Dblue vlink=3Dpurple>

<div class=3DSection1>

I’ve implemented the first round of our SNMP =
agents
– we’ll be supporting get’s only, along with traps; no
set’s will be supported for the first =
release.<o:p></o:p>

<o:p> </o:p>

We’ll be allowing the user to configure the =
SNMP
security through our UI (which does NOT use SNMP), so we’re hoping =
to
keep it as simple as possible. I’ve been testing with what I guess =
is
called “v2” security – where you have to list IP =
addresses of
clients, put them in groups with specific access, etc. (I haven’t =
even
attempted the “v3” stuff yet). But management is wondering =
if we
could make it even simpler for the customer, and step back to =
“v1”,
which I guess is nothing more than a community string and either
“read” or “read/write” =
access.<o:p></o:p>

<o:p> </o:p>

So my question is, is it “okay” to use =
the
simplest security model (and the least secure) if you’re going to =
have view
only data? Or are most SNMP customers going to want a more secure model? =
Again,
we aren’t ready to move to the latest and greatest yet (we want to =
have a
better feel for SNMP in general before we go down that path), so at best =
it
would be the “v2” stuff.<o:p></o:p>

<o:p> </o:p>

Thanks!<o:p></o:p>

<o:p> </o:p>

~ Wendy<o:p></o:p>

</div>

</body>

</html>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C856B1.4D9061E9--

--===============0308336293==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216...et/marketplace
--===============0308336293==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-users mailing list
Net-snmp-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Please see the following page to unsubscribe or change other options:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/...net-snmp-users

--===============0308336293==--

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode