Em 22-12-2015 13:53, m.roth at 5-cent.us escreveu: <snip> > c) wpa-supplicant - again, why? If it's hardwired, and behind switches and > firewalls, why PNAC if every server is running firewalls? > <snip> > mark "let's *please* NOT talk about NAC via Cisco, > and people who allegedly know and have planned > rolling it out...." It's the same reason you think that adding one layer of management (dbus & cia) adds more risk than not adding it. It's another wall to be crossed, if anything happens. Some thing firewalls are enough, some not.