Re: 64 bit firewalls

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 07/03/2014 11:20 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> Yes firewalls do suck, but one of the reasons they suck a lot worse than
> they need to is because there was a lot of resistance in the IETF to the
> whole concept. And so any attempt to make IETF protocols firewall
> friendly was often met with obstructionism. 

And maybe not much guidance to make firewalls protocol-friendly, so to
speak?


[...]
> Outbound traffic is relatively easy to deal with. All the firewall needs
> to do is to decide whether the destination is one that isn't permitted.
> And usually the right decision gets made - though there are many
> enterprise firewalls locked down to only permit outbound port 80 and 443
> and nothing else unless the packets come from a specially privileged
> server.OK this is bad but at least the firewall logs tell us the extent
> of the issue.

Is it really bad from a security point of view? -- at the end of the
day, it obeys the principle of "least privilege"....


[....]
> 
> Note that this is moving beyond firewalls. Firewalls are a weak security
> solution because they only provide policy enforcement at the perimeter.
> In a defense in depth strategy we would want every device in the network
> to perform policy enforcement and policy audit. 

The fact that you deploy a firewall at the perimeter doesn't mean you
can or shouldn't e.g. deploy a host-based firewall.

Cheers,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@xxxxxxxxxxx || fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1







[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]