[fw-wiz] (no subject)
- From: "Paul D. Robertson" <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 22:18:59 -0400 (EDT)
No, the point is that the answer is a "band-aid" approach that requires
a certain setup (the ability to intercept name requests and return fixed
IPs). It is not a general solution that anyone can employ, and it
requires a more invasive modification of someones network instead of
just filtering (or allowing) a port on a firewall.
That's an over-dramatization. If you can't serve authoritative DNS to
your clients, then Google Talk is the *least* of your problems.
It is a "band-aid" approach rather than a mature solution. If Google
can't provide a mature way of preventing traffic *1 what does that tell
you about the design of the program/protocol?
I've yet to meet a protocol designer who thought "Oh, people won't want to
run my thing, I should make it easy to stop it." I've said for a large
number of years that we, as an industry missed our chance to deal with
this when we let things tunnel over HTTP without just blocking HTTP to 90%
of the Internet and holding the line until protocol designers did the
right thing.
With all the stunts modern IM solution perform in order to maintain
network connectivity (tunneling even over telnet...sigh), the obvious
answer is that these protocols are *designed* not to be circumvented or
denied. The answer "oh, just modify your network so that name resolution
That's been true of every new protocol in the last 6 or 7 years, if not
longer. If you're going to let users install things, you're going to have
to deal with it. Software restriction policies, ACLs, etc. You can't
give up control of the end platform, then expect to get decent security
by blocking arbitrary ports.
Paul
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Robertson "My statements in this message are personal opinions
paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx which may have no basis whatsoever in fact."
http://fora.compuwar.net Infosec discussion boards
_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://listserv.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [fw-wiz] (no subject)
- From: Frank Knobbe
- Re: [fw-wiz] (no subject)
- From: Devdas Bhagat
- Re: [fw-wiz] (no subject)
- Prev by Date: Re: [fw-wiz] Blocking Google Talk
- Next by Date: Re: [fw-wiz] Blocking Google Talk
- Previous by thread: Re: [fw-wiz] Anyone out there running PIX 515 ? - Trying todeterm nenewest IOS I can run
- Next by thread: Re: [fw-wiz] (no subject)
- Index(es):