Sockets vs. Named Pipes (2)
From: Voronkov Konstantin (winky_at_abris-ltd.ru)
Date: 05/30/03
- Next message: news.microsoft.com: "how to filter who a local policy is applied to?"
- Previous message: Balaji H: "Re: Security patchs"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 14:40:01 +0400
Hello All!
I'm comparing two IPC (Inter Process Communications)
mechanisms: Sockets and Named Pipes.
I want to solve next problem: secure IPC connection to process under system
account (Windows Service) in multi-users environment.
The problem to solve with sockets is:
- there is a firewall administrator
- there are some users of terminal server
- clients connects to port 1500 to system process
- firewall administrator configured local firewall to pass all requests
to port 1500 via malicious program Thus traffic will be sniffed.
To solve situation 1 we will create file on Local Drive and secure
it with NTFS permission. This file will contains secret key which
is not available to Firewall administrator. Thus traffic is secure.
Suppose firewall administrator agreed with one Client and that Client
sent secret key to firewall administrator. Thus they together
compromised system and can read all traffic.
The only way I see to solve this problem is Public Key cryptography
for key exchange. But this reduces performance.
Does anyone know if the same problem is actual for Named Pipes?
Can Pipes IPC traffic be sniffed? Can backup administrator read Pipes
traffic?
What possible solution can be with TCP for IPC, if any?
Best Regards,
Konstantin
- Next message: news.microsoft.com: "how to filter who a local policy is applied to?"
- Previous message: Balaji H: "Re: Security patchs"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|