Re: Securing webmail - changing a port necessary to ensure security?

[Pete Hunt <lists () petehunt co uk>]

inline

At 16:02 11/02/2004, Jennifer Fountain wrote:
> I am going back and forth on this one with a consultant on this one and
> need an expert opinion.  So, I turn to you :) When configuring webemail
> (such as owa) that is using https, is it better to change the default
> port (443) to an uncommon port (20000)for security reasons?

No.  If running web-based mail hrough https isn't secure enough for your 
organisation, then anything you gain from obfuscating the port ( 
practically nothing ) won't offset the extra faffing about required when 
setting it up.

Your consultant is working on the theory that high ports are less likely to 
be scanned (and discovered vulnerable).  Properly set up, it will be as 
secure as web-based email can be with or without changing the ports.

_Relying_ on the obscure ports is even more dubious.

my 0.02p

Pete



---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free trial: Astaro Security Linux -- firewall with Spam/Virus Protection

Protect your network with the comprehensive security solution that
integrates six applications for ease of use and lower TCO.

Firewall - Virus protection - Spam protection - URL blocking - VPN
- Wireless security.

Download 30-day evaluation at:
http://www.astaro.com/php/contact/securityfocus.php
----------------------------------------------------------------------------