Does the market need a universal "pill" to protect the network

A K

Anton Kovylyaev

Head of Representative Office of Axoft

The industrial segment has its own requirements. The financial sector is quite tightly regulated by the Central Bank. Will we come to the conclusion that we will get some kind of maximally universal device that covers the tasks of customers from all industries, or will industry specifics be taken into account and there will be separate devices and solutions? The question is open.

A B

Alexander Barkhatov

Partner Relations Manager at «Security Code»

Let's leave 1% for some very specific, narrow market.

V I

Vadim Idrisov

Leading presale of «IT Enigma Ufa»

This would be relevant for medium-sized businesses - to use a lot of different functionality in one hardware. But for larger customers, specialized protective equipment will still be required.

D L

Dmitry Lebedev

The leading expert of the «Security Code» company, says:

Here everything will depend on which side to approach this issue. If we look from the point of view of regulation, let's take the same FSTEC orders: No. 239, No. 21, No. 17 - they are all used for different segments: KII, APCS, ISPDN, GIS. The same documents have been developed for banks. But if we look at the requirements that are made within the framework of the orders, then for the most part they are all similar to each other. Of course, there are some key differences that are suitable for a particular area. But if a company fulfills, say, the requirements of Order No. 239, then with a greater degree of probability the company will also comply with all other requirements that are imposed under orders No. 31, No. 17, No. 21. The same with banks. If we consider this topic from the side of scenarios, that is, where solutions are used (for example, to protect the perimeter of an organization or to protect data centers), then the requirements will be different: to ensure the security of data centers, the functionality will have its own requirements, to protect the perimeter of an organization - others .

A D

Andrey Duyun

UserGate Partner Manager confirms:

Yes, here it is necessary to look from tasks. Because if we are talking about automated process control systems, then there is often a need, for example, for a more secure housing in industrial design. Accordingly, some civilian platform does not meet these requirements. If we are talking about the protection of KSPD (corporate data transmission networks), for example, about proxies, then we need filtering lists that can be unified. But if we are talking about the protection of data centers, then most likely there will be a separate “hardware”, with the maximum performance of the ITU, with the implemented capabilities of hardware acceleration, stacking, etc. The experience of world leaders confirms this. Another thing is that the operating system itself for the most part will be unified. And there is hardly any point in sharing something. But in the hardware part, there will be a separation. It is already underway in UserGate: we have separate platforms for automated process control systems, for a corporate network, for data centers.

A C

Alexander Chirkunov

Head of Business Development at Axoft, summed up:

Networks are divided at least into corporate and industrial segments. The corporate segment uses and will continue to use the most unified solutions. As for the protection of process control systems, here I can add that not only specialized cases of protective equipment are required (moisture-resistant, shock-resistant, etc.). The logic of the industrial network protection means must function in the monitoring mode, without disturbing the technological processes in case of false positives, and be able to analyze industrial protocols. This is a very important point.