Great Circle Associates Firewalls
(April 1997)
 

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

Subject: Re: BorderWare Firewall Server
From: Andrew Flint <flint @ border . com>
Organization: Secure Computing Corporation
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 11:01:51 -0400
To: firewalls @ GreatCircle . COM, Jesse Whyte <jesse @ eac . com>
References: <2 . 2 . 32 . 19970411033125 . 006cf218 @ sphinx . sctc . com>

Jesse Whyte wrote:
> 
> I have had to do some performance and security testing on the
> Borderware firewall product over the last couple of weeks and I
> have some issues that I wanted to address here...
> 
> 1) We caused a kernel panic by flooding the firewall system itself
> with ping ECHO_REQUESTS at less than T-1 bandwidth...

 Thank you for your feedback.  We have been unable to reproduce
 this using various ping sizes at near ethernet speeds.  Would
 it be possible to get more information about the test setup
 you are using?

 
> 2) The default configuration loads a web server on port 80 for the
> entire world to see...

 This is, actually, incorrect. 

 The default configuration does include a secure embedded WWW server,
 but all access to the server is disabled.  Should you choose to use
 the functionality of the WWW server, you must separately enable the
 server for each network interface (internal network, Internet, etc.)
 that you wish to grant access.

 
> 3) The firewall doesn't discriminate between internal and external hosts
> when it proxies, (i.e., with a poor setup (the default setup), I can set
> the proxy in my browser to the external interface of the proxy, then try
> to go to the internal interface and the firewall will proxy me
> there...another interesting side effect of this was that you can get
> packets to the web management port 442)

 This is also incorrect.

 The BorderWare Firewall Server has an exceptionally strong
differentiation
 between the internal and external networks.  The OS has been modified
 to change the way TCP/IP thinks about network separation.  The firewall
 most definitely does discriminate between internal and external hosts.

 The setup you describe is not functioning the way you think it is.  The
 external interface will not act as a WWW proxy.  Certain browsers will
 fail silently on this and then just connect you directly to the URL you
 requested.

 If you try this with Netscape 4.0 you will receive the error that the
 firewall-ext.company.com proxy is not a valid proxy server and that
 the browser will attempt to connect you to your destination directly.
 If you enable full packet logging on the WWW service on the firewall
 you will note that, during your tests, no packets reached the external
 interface.  You can also check the proxy logs to note that no packets
 were proxied to the internal interface.

 Please feel free to contact me directly with any additional issues or
 concerns you might have.  The BorderWare Firewall Server has been
 designed from the OS foundation up to provide security.

 Sincerely,

 Andrew Flint

______________________________________________________________________________

     Andrew Flint                        Secure Computing Corporation
     BorderWare Product Manager          Fax 416.813.2001
     Andrew_Flint @
 SecureComputing .
 com    Tel 416.813.2039

Indexed By Date Previous: RE: Managing Firewalls
From: Bill Stackpole <BSTACKPO @ sla . com>
Next: Project Help
From: "ANDREW W. KARCHER" <KARCHERA @ email . rosary . edu>
Indexed By Thread Previous: [SUMMARY] What services are..?
From: pomeranz @ netcom . com (Hal Pomeranz)
Next: Re: BorderWare Firewall Server
From: "Jesse Whyte" <jesse @ eac . com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com