RE: [fw-wiz] Sources for Extranet Designs?
From: Bob Alberti (alberti_at_sanction.net)
To: "Firewall-Wizards" <email@example.com> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:08:54 -0600
One thing I always wonder about in Extranet designs: how liable are you
(the host of the Extranet) if two of your Extranet customers are
competitors? If Customer A can hack your Extranet to, for instance, inspect
Customer B's orders, or even to hack Customer B's network, how liable are
you for not providing a more secure Extranet environment?
Its one thing to protect the host organization from Extranet clients: its
another entirely to protect clients from each other.
[mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Wes
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 1:31 PM
To: 'Baumann, Sean C.'; 'R. DuFresne'
Cc: 'Paul Robertson'; email@example.com
Subject: RE: [fw-wiz] Sources for Extranet Designs?
> 1.) If you say you should never allow access to resources on your
> protected or internal network, how do you handle giving access to
> services that reside on machines that cannot be duplicated (i.e.
> expensive mainframes)?
There are a couple of approaches that I can think of off hand. Approach 1 is
to design the services with extranet connections in mind. Simply put, maybe
the mainframe isn't the right place to house that resource. This is probably
not the answer that you want to hear though. Approach 2 is to accept that
you have a business limitation that is going to force you to implement a
less than ideal security solution. At that point, you mitigate it. What
precise ports need to be opened from the extranet to the internal resource
and grant *only* that access. If they need SQL access but not NFS access
then make sure that your firewall only permits SQL traffic to pass between
the two networks. Things like that.
> 2.) Do most companies require routable address on their extranet?
> Currently we use RFC1918 address for our extranet, but we see that this
> will become a problem in the future as we add partners.
Depends. Assuming that you are going to be using firewalls and advertising
your internal resources as something else (through the use of NAT, etc.)
then you can do that and make the routable addresses what the extranet
partners think they are going to connect with. That being said, you can
pretty much pick any RFC1918 address space at that point and use it in a
similar fashion. The obvious alternative is that someone will need to change
their address space.
More detailed design you will probably have to pay me for. :-)
One thing that this scenario really graphically depicts is why separation of
resources is such a valuable objective. Sure, it sounds really nice to have
all your stuff running on a mainframe running Linux hosts but these are the
kinds of security problems you will then run into. (feel free to expand this
statement as you see fit - i.e. integrated firewall/ids/content filter/spam
control/virus scanning or separate switches vs. VLANs).
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards mailing list