Great Circle Associates Firewalls
(March 1994)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: svr4 and wollongong for bastion host - good idea?
From: John Corb <root @ acid . unitedkingdom . NCR . COM>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 1994 12:37:33 +0000 (GMT)
To: firewalls @ greatcircle . com
Reply-to: john . corb @ UnitedKingdom . NCR . COM

has anyone any comments/info on using unix svr4 boxes as part of a firewall,
i'm planning on a traditional architecture...

		ether			ether		64k leased line
	internal--------ncr system 3000---------cisco-------------------real
	net		unix svr4					world
			+ wollongong win-tcp

turn off ip forwarding in the kernel, remove most of the tcp/udp services
on the host, block source routes on the cisco and set access lists to block
non-essential services, use the tis toolkit to let internal hosts get out
via proxy ftp/telnet, etc.

my main concerns are:

	i've never heard even rumours of a bastion host running wollongong's
	implementation of tcp/ip, is this because no one's tried or is it
	because it isn't a good choice?

	is the tis toolkit good on svr4? i've compiled it ok but haven't had
	a chance to set up any real testing yet

thanks for any help

john

-- 
john .
 corb @
 UnitedKingdom .
 NCR .
 COM           +44 71 725 8837
  it ain't no use turning on your light babe, i'm on the dark side of the road



Follow-Ups:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: IP_FORWARDING
From: db @ whitney . sunbim . be (Danny Backx)
Next: Re: IP_FORWARDING
From: lacoursj @ uprc . com (Jeffrey D. LaCoursiere)
Indexed By Thread Previous: multicast threat
From: bmanning @ is . rice . edu (William Manning)
Next: Re: svr4 and wollongong for bastion host - good idea?
From: Ng Pheng Siong <ngps @ nova . np . ac . sg>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com