Re: [fw-wiz] Firewall Primitives
From: Crispin Cowan (crispin@wirex.com)
Date: 11/06/02
- Next message: Philip J. Koenig: "Re: [fw-wiz] Interlopers on the WLAN"
- Previous message: Roger Marquis: "[fw-wiz] Re: Interlopers on the WLAN"
- In reply to: George Capehart: "Re: [fw-wiz] Firewall Primitives"
- Next in thread: Marcus J. Ranum: "Re: [fw-wiz] Firewall Primitives"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: Crispin Cowan <crispin@wirex.com> To: George Capehart <capegeo@opengroup.org> Date: Wed Nov 6 09:09:41 2002
George Capehart wrote:
>Crispin Cowan wrote:
>
>
>>George Capehart wrote:
>>
>>>This is interesting. So, a firewall really should/could/might be a
>>>multi-layer, multi-protocol switch . . .
>>>
>>>
>>But of course. That's all firewalls ever were, but marketing hates it
>>when people discover that :)
>>
>>
>Doh! OK, I'll buy that. I'd really (in my own way) seen firewalls as being
>more like band-pass filters. But that's probably another discussion. When
>I wrote "switch" I was really thinking "router."
>
>:/g/switch/s//router/g
>
As I was taught, "switch" ::= "level 3" and "router" ::= "level 4".
Firewalls are "whatever freakin' level you like" (see my previous rant
on "intrusion prevention is really firewalls in drag"
<http://lists.insecure.org/firewall-wizards/2002/Aug/0137.html>) so it
amounts to the same thing.
>It really did seem that he was suggesting that the firewall actually
>actively route, as opposed to "look at the packet and drop it if it doesn't
>like it . . ." ;-]
>
And from a security or functionality perspective, why would we care
about the difference?
> So, I really meant to use the term router. That is a
>step beyond the "throw it in the bit bucket if I don't like it" function
>
The "routing" function I had in mind was for "service networks", i.e.
DMZ's as served off a firewall with 3 NICs.
Crispin
-- Crispin Cowan, Ph.D. Chief Scientist, WireX http://wirex.com/~crispin/ Security Hardened Linux Distribution: http://immunix.org Available for purchase: http://wirex.com/Products/Immunix/purchase.html Just say ".Nyet"
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
- Next message: Philip J. Koenig: "Re: [fw-wiz] Interlopers on the WLAN"
- Previous message: Roger Marquis: "[fw-wiz] Re: Interlopers on the WLAN"
- In reply to: George Capehart: "Re: [fw-wiz] Firewall Primitives"
- Next in thread: Marcus J. Ranum: "Re: [fw-wiz] Firewall Primitives"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|