| Presensoft’s IM Policy Manager |
| |
| Why choose a desktop application over
a server application? |
| For IM policy management, when compared
to a server application, a desktop application is: |
|
Here's why... |
In order to properly secure an application
you must map your security solution to the architecture of the
application itself. Think of your mail server. You own
it, you control it. You even control the client component that
accesses it. Think of public IM. You don’t own the server
(in most cases). You don’t even control what clients your
users are using to gain access to it. With email, a server-based
security solution makes sense. With IM, it doesn't.
Proper usage of instant messaging security software is very
similar to proper usage of virus protection software. Think
of it this way: You have a mail server with virus protection
software installed on that server. Do you have virus protection
software on your desktops too? If you are managing viruses at
the server, why bother? Because there are other ways for data
to get in and out of your network and on your PCs than through
your mail server. Virus protection requires a different architecture
than gateway-only to get the job done right. So, you have virus
protection installed on desktops as well as servers.
|
| If you do not control the server –
you have to control the desktops. |
| You have a few choices with respect to
securing public IM. You can: |
 |
Buy the companies that
distribute public IM (not an option) |
|
Manage IM over the wire through an
additional component that has to be added to the stream
of components now filtering data in and out of your network
(better idea, but not the best idea) |
|
Control the only part of this peer
to peer communication tool that you do own –the
desktop (best idea!) |
|
Whether you wish to block or allow IM use, you cannot eliminate
all of the important risks associated with public IM security
and compliance with a gateway only solution.
|
A desktop application eliminates a
single point of failure. If data capture stops working,
one of two things will occur. Either the data will be transmitted
and no capture will take place, or data transmission will stop
and productivity comes to a halt. Data capture technology should
not hinder an employee’s work unless very strict content-blocking
policies are in place. Since this is not usually the case, alternative
ways of capturing data should be used to keep content intact.
This is possible only through desktop data capture. If a network-based
data capture server fails, data sent subsequent to server failure
is lost. With desktop capture, data are stored locally until
the server is brought back on line.
|
A desktop solution requires less IT
than a gateway solution. With desktop solutions, usage
and violations are monitored from the desktop; therefore, changes
in network configuration, IM access entry points and selective
restriction (by IM client or IM user) can be more quickly and
easily set up and maintained from an administration and budget
standpoint. As IM packets find new ways to enter the IT infrastructure,
nothing has to be done from a network perspective.
|
A desktop application is the most logical
choice for true IM encryption. Numerous technologies
exist to provide a means for encryption, and at least two IM
clients (AT&T and Reuters) currently have the ability to
encrypt data incorporated into their client. Companies have
three options for handling encrypted data.
|
The first option is to stop encrypted data at the firewall
and deny continued communication. This is a poor option for
many reasons, including the concern that the only data that
can be captured is data sent in non-encrypted text. While encrypted
data cannot be captured for later review, corporate communications
should not be taking place over the Web in non-encrypted text.
Therefore, a better solution to data capture must be explored.
The second option is to choose a data capture technology that
works with all vendors who provide encryption to gain access
to their unique algorithms. The issue here is that the data
capture vendor’s ability to capture IM communications
is completely dependent on a third party’s ability to
engage in and maintain multiple partnerships—a risky proposition.
A third option, which provides the most flexible and comprehensive
solution for data capture, is desktop capture. Desktop data
capture offers little risk with respect to new and existing
encryption technologies and is unsurpassable when a high priority
is placed on a company’s ability to allow and capture
IM sessions. |
| |
In under an hour, your IT group or a Presensoft staff can
have the software Presensoft up and running in your organization,
controlling a system of 10, 100 or 10,000+ users' IM sessions.
No network changes or any complicated IT changes necessary.
|
| To get started with Presensoft now, |
Request
a Free Trial of Presensoft IM Policy Manager
|
| |
|
| |
Archiving
