A question regarding SOCKs/Proxy vs NAT/PAT

["Michael Gliva" <gliva () us ibm com>]

I would like to hear the opinions of this group on a question that I have
been struggling with.  That is, should we replace our existing SOCKs/Proxy
functions that supports session request traffic flowing 'out-bound' to the
Internet with a firewall appliance running NAT and PAT?   The argument for
this suggestion is that we can lower our operating costs without  weakening
our existing security and this is a general trend within the industry.

I like the idea of terminating all sessions at the border of our network,
as SOCKs/Proxy does now, it gives us options (eg, WEB filtering and
logging) that I don't believe we would have in a NAT environment.  However,
I'm not sure if a proxy set-up really adds any more protections to our
network than does a firewall running NAT and PAT.    And, I really don't
know what the general industry trend is regarding the question of
SOCKs/Proxy vs. NAT/PAT.    Can anyone help to enlighten me?


_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () nfr com
http://www.nfr.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards