Haus doesn’t think so – it sounds more of the same NAC problems that have become so problematic for early adopters. Here’s the scoop on the latest from Redmond as reported by John Fontana for Computerworld.
What is interesting to us is the extension of DirectAccess to XP and Vista users (however, you still need the R2 though). It seems the rollout slow down is a result of developing a central management system for the whole suite. This has always been the problem with NAC (well, that plus the complexity of setting it all up).
Will this solve the remote access issues IT has? We’re not sure. Lot’s of people are talking though – check out these IT complaints (great blog!), our own series on how to rethink remote access, and there are many more out there. We think the only way to solve the remote access problems are for vendors to stop forcing rigid options on the market. Complex, hard to manage and integration issues prevent rethinking today. For example:
- Certificate creation, management
- Two-factor authentication
- End-point security software
- Network AND device firewalls
- Policy enforcement
- Audit reporting (PCI, HIPAA, etc.)
- Running IPsec and SSL parallel systems
- Many vendors, pour integration
NAC is washed up in Haus’ opinion due to the management issues and complex setup requirements. NAC-like functions, however, certainly have their place … as long as it’s easy to manage!