Firewall Wizards mailing list archives

Re: Proxy 2.0 secure?


From: "David Newman" <dnewman () cmp com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:41:43 -0400


Thomas,

I'm sorry you're attacking me, for we are actually in violent agreement
here. Let me remind you that I came in on this thread by *agreeing* with
you that running a finite, known set of attacks against a properly
configured device does *not* mean a device is secure.

Also, a clarification: ISS Safesuite has multiple modules, including one
that is intended for use against *firewalls,* not end-systems. It was this
firewall-specific module we used in our testing.  I have no interest in ISS
Safesuite, nor have I ever represented it as encompassing the universe of
attacks a firewall would face.

dn






tqbf () pobox com on 06/30/98 05:04:20 AM

Please respond to tqbf () pobox com

To:   David Newman/NYC/CMPNotes
cc:   tqbf () pobox com, firewall-wizards () nfr net
Subject:  Re: Proxy 2.0 secure?




The article made clear that we did not in any way certify products as
"secure," whatever that means. Our tests evaluated only whether properly

You stated that your methodology would not account for misconfiguration or
new attacks. I am stating that your methodology does not account for old
attacks, either, but rather only the specific incarnations of a specific
set of largely irrelevant (to a firewall) attacks generated by a network
testing tool designed to test end-systems and not firewalls. Your
disclaimer is thus seriously misleading.

both very real problems, but beyond the scope of our test. I agree that
scanners and IDS products are a good way of evaluating device
configuration
(and I'm pleased to see you think IDS products are good for something ;-)

I do not think I-D is a good way of verifying device configuration; I
think that the use of I-D for config verification is seriously flawed.
Moreover, you did not use I-D tools in your test (or if you did, you
didn't document that in your article).

Additionally, I do not think IDS products based on passive network
analysis ("sniffing") are worth anything at all. I have no opinion about
any other form of I-D (and there are many others, some of which are
incarnated in very popular commercial packages); please do not
misunderstand this.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Thomas H. Ptacek                       SNI Labs, Network Associates, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
http://www.pobox.com/~tqbf     "If you're so special, why aren't you dead?"










Current thread: