NAT or internal servers with "real" IP addresses using NAT 0 can access
anything until you block it.  Outbound requests (such as http, ftp, etc) are
all enabled by default.  Users outside the firewall cannot access internal
IPs without access-list or conduit statements.

In short, all outbound enabled and all inbound disabled by default.

For your conduit permit icmp any any I would enable echo reply only rather
than full icmp.  Echo reply only allows replies back to the person pinging
or tracerouting.  Full icmp can be exploited in DOS attacks.
example:
access-list 10 permit icmp any any echo-reply
access-group 10 interface outside
(apply one to interface inside for outbound)

Allen

----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Alston 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 4:08 PM
Subject: Re: PIX conduit & access lists [7:26684]


> Patrick & Allen,
>   Thanks for the responses -- helps loads.  I'm still slightly confused.
>
> I did a clear conduit expecting to block all incoming traffic.  Following
> the clear conduit, I did a show  conduit  to  verify   there were not any
> conduits  in operation.  At that time, I was still able to receive web
> traffic at my workstation.  For that matter, the conduit statements only
> applied to specific servers so why am I able to receive http at my
> workstation?  I did try to PING an IP address which failed  when I removed
> the conduits and  worked when I restored "conduit permit icmp any any" --
> that behaved as expected.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Steve
>
> ""Allen May""  wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Very true and a good point, but the original question was about conduits
> > which only apply to lower->higher.  Higher->lower requires NAT.  I
> > accidentally typed access-list below but meant conduit. ;)  *slap self &
> get
> > more coffee*.  It still applies but wasn't what I meant to say.
> >
> > Thanks for pointing that out though.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Patrick W. Bass
> > To:
> > Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 10:14 PM
> > Subject: Re: PIX conduit & access lists [7:26684]
> >
> >
> > > ""Allen May""  wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > I'm not sure if this was answered or not, but a firewall always
> assumes
> > a
> > > > deny all at the end of the access-list for inbound.  Outbound is
> > different
> > > > since it allows all by default.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Remeber this:  Higher security level to lower security level,
implicitly
> > > allowed.  Lower security level to higher security level, implicitly
> > denied.
> > > Otherwise it gets tricky once you start messing with multipile DMZs.
> > >
> > > > Also, access-lists are the way to go since conduits will be phased
out
> > in
> > > > the near future.
> > > >
> > > > Allen
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Steve Alston
> > > > To:
> > > > Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 9:25 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: PIX conduit & access lists [7:26684]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Carroll,
> > > > >   Thanks for the reply.  I'm using conduits now, but will switch
to
> > > access
> > > > > lists in the future.  (I'd like to fully understand the
> configuration
> > I
> > > > > inherited before I start making changes)  Are implicit denys
> inserted
> > > > behind
> > > > > each conduit as well?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ""Carroll Kong""  wrote in message
> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > Implicit denys behind every access-list are inserted.  Are you
> > > > > > mixing conduits and access-lists?  You really should not.  Use
ALL
> > > > > conduits
> > > > > > or ALL access-lists.  If both are used, conduits take priority
and
> > > > > override
> > > > > > your access-lists.  Access-lists are first match, conduits are
any
> > > > match.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > At 09:24 AM 11/19/01 -0500, Steve Alston wrote:
> > > > > > >Does the PIX 506 require an explicit deny statement after
setting
> > up
> > > a
> > > > > > >permit conduit or access list.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >I appear to be receiving more traffic (e.g. NTP) than my
conduit
> > > > > statements
> > > > > > >allow.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Thanks much,
> > > > > > >Steve
> > > > > > -Carroll Kong




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27642&t=26684
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to