Security Basics mailing list archives
RE: Deep Inspection Firewall / IPS
From: "Abimbola, Abiola" <Abiola.Abimbola () bskyb com>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:05:47 -0000
Hi, Tony, Firstly, an IPS inspects the payload of your network packet for malicious data that is way its good to have in inspecting http 80. ( not https - this is encrypted). Hence I do not see what a NAT will bring here. NATs are used for traffic mapping. Just use IPS, that will get the job done. -----Original Message----- From: listbounce () securityfocus com [mailto:listbounce () securityfocus com] On Behalf Of Tony Raboza Sent: 29 October 2008 13:16 To: security-basics () securityfocus com Subject: Deep Inspection Firewall / IPS Hi, I'm trying to get my company to buy a firewall with deep-inspection capabilities or IPS. From my research what is really needed is a deep inspection firewall/IPS - because a stateful packet inspection will not do. For example for a web server - you close off all the ports except port 80 /443 (http/https). But threats/malware can come in through port 80 disguising itself as normal http traffic, so we need a firewall which would inspect this - hence the need for deep packet inspection/IPS. But what if we also do NAT? Can malware still come in through port 80? I've been reading this - "Red Hat 8 Compromise" - http://honeyblog.org/junkyard/reports/redhat-compromise.pdf , but my thought on this one is that if the honeypot RH8 was NATted could the attacker have opened up a shell which might either be port 22 (ssh) or 23 (telnet)? What if only port 80/443 was port-forwarded? Can the attacker open up a shell? Questions: 1. Am I correct in my statements above? 2. If I am correct - can you give me real-world examples of exploits that come in through port 80/port 443 which can compromise a Unix/Linux webserver as well as a Windows web server? Thanks, Tony ----------------------------------------- Information in this email including any attachments may be privileged, confidential and is intended exclusively for the addressee. The views expressed may not be official policy, but the personal views of the originator. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete it from your system. You should not reproduce, distribute, store, retransmit, use or disclose its contents to anyone. Please note we reserve the right to monitor all e-mail communication through our internal and external networks. SKY and the SKY marks are trade marks of British Sky Broadcasting Group plc and are used under licence. British Sky Broadcasting Limited (Registration No. 2906991), Sky Interactive Limited (Registration No. 3554332), Sky-In-Home Service Limited (Registration No. 2067075) and Sky Subscribers Services Limited (Registration No. 2340150) are direct or indirect subsidiaries of British Sky Broadcasting Group plc (Registration No. 2247735). All of the companies mentioned in this paragraph are incorporated in England and Wales and share the same registered office at Grant Way, Isleworth, Middlesex TW7 5QD.
Current thread:
- Deep Inspection Firewall / IPS Tony Raboza (Oct 29)
- Re: Deep Inspection Firewall / IPS Adriel Desautels (Oct 29)
- RE: Deep Inspection Firewall / IPS Abimbola, Abiola (Oct 29)
- RE: Deep Inspection Firewall / IPS Serge Vondandamo (Oct 29)
- RE: Deep Inspection Firewall / IPS Bryan S. Sampsel (Oct 29)