Yep, this is what I heard from the TAC person.

"Also the ruleset have been updated to support the IE 8 update. The
ruleset version number that this started with is 62335."

-Roberto

-----Original Message-----
From: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Isabelle Graham
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 1:05 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: IE 8

It looks like a check for IE8 just posted. You may need to do a manual
update to see it.

--
Isabelle Graham
Information Security
American University

Jim Thomas wrote:
> Or maybe Cisco maintaining a listserv/blog (maybe off Cisco Learning
> Network) tied into the BU where they can provide 'roadmap' info and
> support. If you have to go to TAC to get details on Cisco questions
that
> only the BU can answer then a direct line into the BU might be
> beneficial when the end result could potentially help out hundreds of
> customers. I know some TAC engineers monitor this listserv and some of
> the BU but since I've been on here, I've seen a lot of griping
regarding
> the product line. I haven't heard a lot of response from Cisco. Maybe
> there is another avenue that Cisco can provide that might help.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Jim
> 
>  
> 
> Jim Thomas
> 
> Area Networks, Inc.
> 
> CCIE Security #16674
> 
> CCSP,CCNP,CCDP
> 
>      [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> 
> 
>      Office: 650-242-8050
> 
>     Cell: 916-342-2265
> 
>  
> 
>   
> 
>  
> 
> From: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Eric Weakland
> Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 6:06 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: IE 8
> 
>  
> 
> 
> I've noticed the lack of input.  I suspect Cisco has forbid their
folks
> from posting useful information to this list anymore.  Unfortunately
my
> team can't get useful answers from TAC. (STILL!) 
> 
> I also am a Perfigo early adopter and no longer think Cisco is a
viable
> alternative in this space.  I've tried for YEARS to try and get them
to
> see how shoe-horning this product into the router support model
doesn't
> work, how a product like this needs aggressive support for new
> vulnerabilities and changes.  I thought things were going to get
better,
> but it doesn't look like it. 
> 
> Cisco- if you're out there, why don't you just admit you don't care
> about this product line, and EOS/L it so that we can have more
traction
> when asking for funds to upgrade to other products?  Or state that it
> isn't suited to the Higher-ed market? 
> 
> I must add that I am glad Perfigo was where it was when we started to
> really need it.  Getting CCA implemented across our campus was a real
> win from a resource perspective - many fewer viruses.  But this
product
> has not grown/been supported in a way that makes it viable any more,
as
> you put so well, Rand. 
> 
> My team likes Impulse and Juniper's solutions so far.  We're going to
> start looking at those soon.  Perhaps we should set up another
listserv
> somewhere - product independent? 
> 
> Cheers, 
> 
> Eric 
> 
> Eric Weakland, CISSP, CNE
> Director, Information Security
> Office of Information Technology 
> American University
> eric at american.edu
> 202.885.2241
> 
> ______________________________________
> AU IT will never ask for your password via e-mail. 
> Don't share your password with anyone! 
> 
> 
> 
> "Hall, Rand" <[log in to unmask]> 
> Sent by: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators
> <[log in to unmask]> 
> 
> 04/02/2009 08:50 AM 
> 
> Please respond to
> Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators
> <[log in to unmask]>
> 
> To
> 
> [log in to unmask] 
> 
> cc
> 
> 	
> Subject
> 
> Re: IE 8
> 
>  
> 
> 		
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone notice the recent dearth of Cisco input on this list? I find
that
> troubling.
> 
> Direct quotes on the list last fall from a Cisco support person (name
> omitted because he's innocent):
> 
> "Word from the BU is that they will only update from Microsoft once a
> month, so this one will not go into the checks and rule set until next
> months Patch Tuesday release."
> 
> "All I can say is that myself and some of my colleagues did put some 
> pressure on to add this in. I know we sound like a broken record when
we
> 
> say this, but I would strongly encourage anyone who is unhappy about 
> this to tell their account teams and have them put pressure on from 
> their side as well."
> 
> So, this will be at least the third time in six months that Cisco's
> shrugging ambivalence has made their product ineffective.
> 
> In October, Microsoft issued a critical out-of-band patch for which
> Cisco would not create checks.
> 
> In November, Cisco botched an update which ultimately prevented access
> to the aforementioned and now long-awaited out-of-band patch check.
> 
> And now, IE8.
> 
> The first two times I followed the prescribed advice and ran my
concern
> up through my account team...and heard nothing.
> 
> Unfortunately, I think I'm going to be forced to return the favor. I'm
> one of the original Perfigo people who's got the end of life software.
> When the Cisco NAC RFQ line doesn't this summer ring they'll know it
was
> me.
> 
> So, Bruce, how do you like Bradford?
> 
> Cheers,
> Rand
> 
> --
> Rand P. Hall * Director, Network Services
> Merrimack College * SunGard Higher Education
> 315 Turnpike Street, North Andover MA 01845 * Tel 978-837-5000
> Fax 978-837-5383 * [log in to unmask] * www.sungardhe.com
> 
> CONFIDENTIALITY:  This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain
> confidential, proprietary and privileged information, and unauthorized
> disclosure or use is prohibited.  If you received this e-mail in
error,
> please notify the sender and delete this e-mail from your system.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Osborne, Bruce
W.
> (NS)
> Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 7:26 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: IE 8
> 
> Rob,
> 
> That is correct.  You have to update each OS rule. Rinse & repeat
after
> every "Patch Tuesday" update.
> 
> Bruce
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert J. Rutkowski [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 6:09 PM
> Subject: Re: IE 8
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong please.. In order to use this manually created
> check, if I don't have any other manual checks incorporated into my
> hotfix rules, then I need to make copies of every hotfix rule (XP, XP
> MCE, XP Tablet, Vista Basic, Vista Home Premium, etc...) and add this
> check as an OR for the IE area to all of my copies, and then enable
them
> for the Requirement. This is the way I understood it, I could very
well
> be incorrect though. It seems like a lot of work just to tell it to
> allow IE8. 
> 
> Also, if that's what needs to be done, then why can't Cisco simply
> update their hotfix rules for everyone? It's sad that they would tell
> you how to manually do a workaround, but not just do it themselves...
> 
> Rob
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Roberto Montoya
> Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 2:06 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: IE 8
> 
> This is what we got on a case that we opened.
> 
> "For now we will have to create a custom check until the next agent
> version download has been released. Here is an outline for the
customer
> check that you can put in place:
> 
>    Check Category - Registry Check
>    Check Type - Registry Value
>    Registry Key - HLKM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\
>    Value Name - Version
>    Value Data Type - String
>    Operator - starts with
>    Value Data - 8.0
> 
> For now we are expecting support for IE8 within the next two weeks.
> Right now there is a bug for this issue and is listed below:
> Bug ID: CSCsy62611"
> 
> 
> HTH,
> 
> -Roberto
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Terry Mitchell
> Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 9:52 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: IE 8
> 
> Anyone from Cisco/NAC team willing provide an estimate for IE8 support
> (days, weeks or months?). It doesn't have to be carved in stone, but a
> ballpark estimate would be most useful for planning and support
> purposes. 
> 
> Thanks in advance.
> 
> Terry
>