The old chicken or the egg game

So Michelle over at En Garde! has a very well reasoned response to my post on the coincidence of what she describes as the perfect NAC solution just so happens to be a description of ConSentry's NAC solution, which of course she works for.  Michelle makes some good points about post-connect NAC and how much more valuable it is then pre-connect (which she claims is of limited value. Does that mean post-connect is invaluable?) NAC.  I will address her arguments on that either later in this article or at another time.  Instead I wanted for a moment to touch on another thought that she brought up a few times and is something that we have run into before.  Namely, Michelle says that whether or not she worked for ConSentry, her beliefs are her beliefs around NAC and are for reasons "well beyond the fact that I work at ConSentry".

Hey far be it from me to doubt Michelle on this.  But this got me to thinking (that could be dangerous).  This is similar to a discussion I had once with Amrit Williams when he joined Big Fix.  Mike Rothman I remember chimed in on it too, though I could not find it on his blog now (you need to use the Lijit search for your blog Mike).  Here is the deal, was Amrit a big fan of continuous policy enforcement before joining Big Fix and that is why he took the position?  Amrit says yes.  By the same token, obviously Michelle was down on pre-admission testing and VLAN's prior to taking her position to ConSentry.  Then I thought to myself, is that why I am at StillSecure, because I like the philosophy around the products? Well not really, I actually get to shape the philosophy around the products.  I remember when Mitchell and his customer experience team did all of the customer experience interviews and how important pre-admission and access testing was.  But in any event, let me ask you: When you are looking for a job how important is the philosophy of the company on products important to you.  Another words did the chicken come first or the egg.  Did you feel the way you do and therefore sort of pre-select the company you work for or did getting the job and your own pride in what you do taint your thoughts?  I think at best it is a little of both.

I think it great that Michelle advocates her companies position so fervently and I truly believe that she believes that this is exactly in line with her thoughts all along on this subject (for as much as she actually thought about the subject prior to ConSentry). In the case of Amrit, I also think that Amrit being familiar with Big Fix felt that this matched his thoughts all along.  But let me bring in another blast from the past, my friend Ross Brown.  When Ross was in at eEye, who was more of an advocate of their position and products then Ross.  Ask him now what he believes and when his quiet period is over, he might have something else to say. So I guess my thoughts on the subject is that though we all advocate our companies positions in earnest righteousness, but you can't blame people for being just a little bit skeptical.  Then again who knows, when they carry me out of here (feet first probably), I may find that I think behavior, host based security is the way to go.

Anyway, on the issue of pre versus post admission control, Michelle the real truth is they are both very valuable and a good solution needs both.  I don't know how real  your "use whatever you got" philosophy on agents is, but you do need something.  On the issue of inline versus out-of-band, Michelle real simple, unless you are going to be a switch, you are just another appendage of boxes on a network that needs more boxes like a hole in the head. I think you know that (probably knew it before you came to ConSentry too) and I think the ConSentry folks realize it and that is why you are moving towards becoming a switch, as are the other inline players.