June 28, 2004
But we were unable to complete the review of this product due to some unfortunate mix-ups with the supplier. We were initially supplied with an engineering model which failed to even connect to the network, and after much consultation with support teams, a new model was supplied. It fared little better.
Our testing staff were unable to configure the unit to the required test configuration, experiencing difficulties with the management interface and documentation. Even delving into the underlying Linux OS failed to yield results, and conference calls with engineers at NetScreen did not help.
Even basic network configuration was difficult, and once up, performance was far below a level we could test. It clearly was not an acceptable customer solution.
NetScreen, which was midway through its acquisition process at the time of the review, has acknowledged that its support and engineering teams were at fault in this case. Internal confusion over which product to supply, and a failure to register our unit for support meant that our access to the correct technical support teams was limited.
The vendor claims the customer experience would be vastly different, and has undertaken to supply us with new equipment to test.
As a result, the IDP 1000 has not received a rating. In the interests of objectivity and to ensure that we offer a fair review, we will conduct a review of the product according to this group test's criteria and methodology, which will be published separately in a future issue.
Sign up to our newsletters
SC Magazine Articles
- RSA: Cyber-security industry is "fundamentally broken", says Amit Yoran
- DOD contractors pay $13 million fine for hiring Russian programmers
- Top Priority: Federal Government must get cybersecurity right
- Cyber and real war come together in the Ukraine
- Version 4.0 of ransomware Cryptowall released, now encrypts file names