Firewall Wizards mailing list archives

RE: Home Environment Cisco


From: "Noonan, Wesley" <Wesley_Noonan () bmc com>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 16:23:54 -0500

Filtering outbound... stateful inspection... DoS controls in place... proxy
filtering... SMURF, Flood, Teardrop, Land and exploit prevention, most of
the ICSA labs requirements... other than that, it sounds great!! :-(

Sometimes I think that GRC, NMap and Nessus are the worst security tools out
there. People run them, get negatives and think "wow, I must really be doing
great". Unfortunately it seems that a lot of folks seem to think that as
long as GRC "Shields UP" says everything looks good, it is.

I really wish the NAT proponents would read the RFC where the authors
themselves condemn NAT as a security solution in and of itself. It is a
great component of a security solution, but it is not alone a solution. If
the folks that authored it realize this, no offense but I doubt any of us
here are bright enough to find a flaw in that logic.

Wes Noonan, MCSE/CCNA/CCDA/NNCSS/Security+
Senior QA Rep.
BMC Software, Inc.
(713) 918-2412
wnoonan () bmc com
http://www.bmc.com


-----Original Message-----
From: hermit921 [mailto:hermit921 () yahoo com]
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 12:29
To: firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
Subject: RE: [fw-wiz] Home Environment Cisco

Given all this discussion, I have to ask about NAT.  I have a small
Netgear
DSL router (using NAT) at home.  I consider it a great firewall because it
doesn't let in any packets at all when I run nmap scans from the
outside.  It syslogs to my unix machine.  What more could I want in a
firewall for a home environment?

hermit921

At 10:26 PM 5/29/2003 +0200, Ben Nagy wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: firewall-wizards-admin () honor icsalabs com
[mailto:firewall-wizards-admin () honor icsalabs com] On Behalf
Of salgak () speakeasy net
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 9:39 PM
To: nathan.grandbois () cerdant com; firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com

-----Original Message-----
From: Nathan [mailto:nathan.grandbois () cerdant com]
He has a Solaris ultra 60, and two win98 workstations at
home he wants to be able to communicate, as well as have access to
the
internet (NAT).
[deleted]

Reminder: a 50-dollar router from BestBuy also includes a
Firewall.  A Cisco 1600 or 2500-series will not.  And NAT is
NOT a firewall.

[deleted]

I'm not going to run over the NAT / FW discussion again, I think my
opinion
on the matter is pretty well documented in the archives, but I am more
than
happy to use _dynamic_ NAT as a pretty effective security mechanism for
home
users. I do normally back it up with ACLs anyway, but that's just out of
general principle.

ben

_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards


Current thread: