Re: Issue with replacing SonicWall VPN with Cisco ASA VPN devices

[robbie.jacka () regions com]

Caveat: this has only been fixed in 7.2(1) and later, if memory serves.

Robbie



                                                                           
             Anthony                                                       
             <ez4me2c3d@gmail.                                             
             com>                                                       To 
             Sent by:                  Firewall Wizards Security Mailing   
             firewall-wizards-         List                                
             bounces@listserv.         <firewall-wizards@listserv.icsalabs 
             icsalabs.com              .com>                               
                                                                        cc 
                                       "Behm, Jeffrey L." <BehmJL () bv com>, 
             09/26/2007 07:33          firewall-wizards-bounces@listserv.i 
             PM                        csalabs.com,                        
                                       michael () wanderingbark net           
                                                                   Subject 
             Please respond to         Re: [fw-wiz] Issue with replacing   
             Firewall Wizards          SonicWall VPN with Cisco ASA  VPN   
             Security Mailing          devices                             
                   List                                                    
             <firewall-wizards                                             
             @listserv.icsalab                                             
                  s.com>                                                   
                                                                           
                                                                           




Robbie,
The ASA code 7.x has addressed VPN hairpinning with the
same-security-traffic permit intra-interface command.
I've done it several times with great success.  And with proper ACLs and
routes you can direct the traffic where ever you want.

Jeff,
What you are trying to do is possible on the ASAs.  You're basically
setting up a hub/spoke vpn model with l2l's between HQ and remote
offices.  Cisco.com has documents on how to set this up.

References:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/products/ps6120/products_configuration_example09186a00807f9a89.shtml

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/products_configuration_example09186a00804675ac.shtml

General Configuration Examples
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/products/ps6120/prod_configuration_examples_list.html


Anthony


robbie.jacka () regions com wrote:
> The biggest possible issue is hairpinning the internet-bound traffic
inside
> of the 5520, not tunneling the traffic back from the 5505s. PIX 6.x has
> traditionally had a problem with this, if I recall correctly, and I'm not
> sure that it's been fixed in PIX 7.x/ASA code
>
> Robbie

>              Michael Cox

>              <michael@wanderin

>              gbark.net>
To
>              Sent by:
firewall-wizards@listserv.icsalabs.
>              firewall-wizards-         com

>              bounces@listserv.
cc
>              icsalabs.com              "Behm, Jeffrey L." <BehmJL () bv com>

>
Subject
>                                        Re: [fw-wiz] Issue with replacing

>              09/26/2007 09:25          SonicWall VPN with Cisco ASA VPN

>              AM                        devices

>

>

>              Please respond to

>              Firewall Wizards

>              Security Mailing

>                    List

>              <firewall-wizards

>              @listserv.icsalab

>                   s.com>

>

>

> For clarification, are there clients connecting to the 5505's, or is it
> just a site-to-site setup?
>
> In any case, what you want to do should be possible. When you define the
> ACL for what traffic goes down the tunnel from the branch to the hub,
> simply do "permit ip <LAN network address> <LAN netmask> any". Reverse
> this on the hub.
>
> I'm stumped as to why they think this is a security issue.
>
> Maybe TAC didn't understand what you want to do (or maybe I don't).
>
> Regards,
> Michael
>
> On Tuesday 25 September 2007 09:03, Behm, Jeffrey L. wrote:
>
> > Hello Wizards,
> >
> > Our network team is replacing the client's SonicWall devices with
> > Cisco ASA 5505 (remote office) and 5520 (HQ) devices. The SonicWall
> > devices were basically used as VPN endpoints in remote offices to be
> > concentrated back to the corporate HQ. All traffic not destined for
> > the local LAN in the remote offices was sent to the corporate office
> > via the "Route all traffic through this SA" functionality in the
> > SonicWall. This worked well for the environment, but now there is the
> > need to replace these devices, and Cisco ASA devices have been
> > chosen.
> >
> > They are now trying to duplicate that functionality via the Cisco
> > devices, but in talking with Cisco TAC, they say such a configuration
> > is not possible, and even if it were, it would not be a security best
> > practice. Implementation of the Cisco device has broken all Internet
> > connectivity from the remote offices, since the only traffic allowed
> > out to/from the Internet is through HQ (with the exception of the
> > site to site VPN traffic to allow connectivity between remote offices
> > and HQ). Remote offices can see everything on the HQ LAN, because the
> > Cisco device is configured with IP information that allows it to
> > route traffic to HQ.
> >
> > I can see some of Cisco's arguments regarding it not being a security
> > best practice, but in the scenario of centralized management and
> > monitoring of Internet-bound traffic, has anyone successfully
> > configured the Cisco devices to mimic the "Route all traffic through
> > this SA" functionality present in the SonicWall devices? I understand
> > they could open up the Cisco devices to allow traffic out from each
> > office, but that would require monitoring every remote office, and
> > deviates from the centralized monitoring/management path we are
> > currently traversing. I haven't personally been involved in this
> > implementation, but was approached by the network team due to my
> > security background, so I can get more details from the network team
> > if necessary.
> >
> > We are simply trying to mimic in the Cisco devices the "Route all
> > traffic through this SA" functionality present in the SonicWall
> > devices.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Jeff
> > _______________________________________________
> > firewall-wizards mailing list
> > firewall-wizards () listserv icsalabs com
> > https://listserv.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
> _______________________________________________
> firewall-wizards mailing list
> firewall-wizards () listserv icsalabs com
> https://listserv.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> firewall-wizards mailing list
> firewall-wizards () listserv icsalabs com
> https://listserv.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards

_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () listserv icsalabs com
https://listserv.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards


_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () listserv icsalabs com
https://listserv.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards