<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Secure Desktop = NAC for SSL? in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/secure-desktop-nac-for-ssl/m-p/861475#M1019609</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes, this is called the Cache Cleaner, but it does not encrypt files on the desktop and is a lot more basic as far as the level of&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;protection it provides.  SSL VPN (clientless) will allow them to do these tasks, while CSD would get in the way (on purpose) of them saving files between sessions.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2007 19:49:49 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>ebreniz</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2007-11-09T19:49:49Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Secure Desktop = NAC for SSL?</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/secure-desktop-nac-for-ssl/m-p/861474#M1019608</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Is there a product positioning paper that compares clientless ssl vpn to secure desktop to anyconnect?  Is secure desktop essentially NAC for remote SSL clients?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 09:45:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/secure-desktop-nac-for-ssl/m-p/861474#M1019608</guid>
      <dc:creator>gm</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-21T09:45:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Secure Desktop = NAC for SSL?</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/secure-desktop-nac-for-ssl/m-p/861475#M1019609</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes, this is called the Cache Cleaner, but it does not encrypt files on the desktop and is a lot more basic as far as the level of&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;protection it provides.  SSL VPN (clientless) will allow them to do these tasks, while CSD would get in the way (on purpose) of them saving files between sessions.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2007 19:49:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/secure-desktop-nac-for-ssl/m-p/861475#M1019609</guid>
      <dc:creator>ebreniz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-11-09T19:49:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Secure Desktop = NAC for SSL?</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/secure-desktop-nac-for-ssl/m-p/3786992#M1019610</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Secure desktops have SSL&amp;nbsp;security as it prevents unauthorized access.&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://epsonsupports.net/blog/how-to-fix-printer-offline/" target="_self"&gt;printer offline fix&lt;/A&gt; &lt;SPAN&gt;compares clientless SSL VPN to secure desktop to and connect. So it is necessary to have ssl&amp;nbsp;security.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2019 08:32:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/secure-desktop-nac-for-ssl/m-p/3786992#M1019610</guid>
      <dc:creator>timpaines</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-01-24T08:32:07Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

