Re: Terminal Services over VPN

From: Tomasz Barbaszewski (tomekb_at_aba.krakow.pl)
Date: 08/27/03

  • Next message: Blom, Casper A SITI-ITDPET: "RE: Security from VPN connections"
    Date: 27 Aug 2003 12:15:30 -0000
    To: security-basics@securityfocus.com
    
    
    ('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is) In-Reply-To: <3F3BE632.8010108@cmhsweb.org>

    >Received: (qmail 16249 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2003 22:09:57 -0000
    >Received: from outgoing3.securityfocus.com (205.206.231.27)
    > by mail.securityfocus.com with SMTP; 14 Aug 2003 22:09:57 -0000
    >Received: from lists.securityfocus.com (lists.securityfocus.com
    [205.206.231.19])
    > by outgoing3.securityfocus.com (Postfix) with QMQP
    > id E2371A3544; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 16:08:19 -0600 (MDT)
    >Mailing-List: contact security-basics-help@securityfocus.com; run by ezmlm
    >Precedence: bulk
    >List-Id: <security-basics.list-id.securityfocus.com>
    >List-Post: <mailto:security-basics@securityfocus.com>
    >List-Help: <mailto:security-basics-help@securityfocus.com>
    >List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:security-basics-unsubscribe@securityfocus.com>
    >List-Subscribe: <mailto:security-basics-subscribe@securityfocus.com>
    >Delivered-To: mailing list security-basics@securityfocus.com
    >Delivered-To: moderator for security-basics@securityfocus.com
    >Received: (qmail 24935 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2003 13:38:39 -0000
    >Message-ID: <3F3BE632.8010108@cmhsweb.org>
    >Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 15:42:42 -0400
    >From: "David Y. Ng" <dng@cmhsweb.org>
    >User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4)
    Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
    >X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
    >MIME-Version: 1.0
    >To: security-basics@securityfocus.com
    >Subject: Terminal Services over VPN
    >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
    >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    >
    We are using IPSec in order to protect RDP transmissions.
    There is one trick - the best way is to do it in additional device.
    Personally we prepared LINUX+Free S/Wan box, which act as IPSec Gate
    between Thin Clients (equiped with IPSec) and MS Server.
    Result is very good. Server is working as usuall (w/o any changes), but
    all transmissions RDP Client to the IPSec Gate Box (it is standing on the
    server) are encrypted (even AES is possible).
    Solution is VERY FAST. We had testing over 100 simultaneous connections.
    You can use also CISCO, but it offer ~900 kpbs (w/o hardware acc.), but
    with Embedded Linux/Free S/Wan box you can reach easily 15-50 Mbps (I mean
    of course encrypted traffic).
    Similar idea is published as a SINA project in Germany (www.bsi.bund.de).

    Best regards

    Tomasz
    >Has anyone used Terminal Services over Microsoft's VPN
    >server? I need to run some program off the server and when I
    >used just the VPN, it was terribly slow. The solution on paper
    >is to run the program off Terminal Services and just let it
    >pass through the VPN which could be faster, supposedly.
    >
    >Any experiences with this? Is Terminal Services in itself
    >secure? I read there's some form of encryption also but
    >is it comparable to VPN in a way?
    >
    >
    >--------------------------------------------------------------------------
    -
    >--------------------------------------------------------------------------

    --
    >
    >
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training Federal, September 29-30 (Training), 
    October 1-2 (Briefings) in Tysons Corner, VA; the world's premier 
    technical IT security event.  Modeled after the famous Black Hat event in 
    Las Vegas! 6 tracks, 12 training sessions, top speakers and sponsors.  
    Symantec is the Diamond sponsor.  Early-bird registration ends September 6.Visit us: www.blackhat.com
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    

  • Next message: Blom, Casper A SITI-ITDPET: "RE: Security from VPN connections"

    Relevant Pages

    • L2TP/IPSec Verbindung läuft mit XP SP2 nicht mehr
      ... workstation2 mit Windows.xp SP1a und IPSec NAT-T Traversal Update, ... Windows 2003 VPN RRAS Server, ...
      (microsoft.public.de.german.windowsxp.networking)
    • Server 2003 macht VPN RRas auf Server Freigabe nicht richtig
      ... Das IPSec würde ich nur ungern auf dem VPN Server einrichten. ... Testhalber habe ich die Richtlinie auch auf dem Server eingerichtet, ...
      (microsoft.public.de.security.netzwerk.sicherheit)
    • Re: Terminal Services
      ... RWW is included in Premium and Standard and is similar to terminal services, ... > Am I correct in my thougths that no matter if we ran SBS or Windows Server ... >> Web Wokplace or VPN and do what you wish. ...
      (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
    • Re: Which is the best for allowing users to work from home? Terminal Services / Remote Access?
      ... I had pretty much ruled out Remote Control of individual PC's. ... terminal services or VPN is the way to go. ... With 2003 Terminal Services, I suppose I'd be looking at an additional ... Server 2003 box with terminal service licenses which sounds like it ...
      (microsoft.public.windows.server.general)
    • Re: need help setting up local and remote server access
      ... If you want remote access then you have a couple of options: RDP or VPN (or ... recommended that you install Terminal Services on a Domain Controller ... Are you going to run Exchange Server 2003? ... I have Windows server 2003 active directory domain created and will have 8 ...
      (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)