Truer words were never spoken... Don Ely - NMBOTWBAS and then some [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----Original Message----- From: Webb, Andy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 3:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp On specific ports? Sure, why not? I'd allow 443 to an inside box. It requires authentication and it's encrypted. Any vulnerability in the application itself would be just as harmful in the DMZ. I'd allow 25 to an inside box. The endpoint is a system that accepts the mail and scans it for viruses and malicious content. Any vulnerability in the application would be almost as harmful in the DMZ. As it stands I have half the number of systems to secure in my design as you do in yours. If we both block 98% of the vulnerabilities on those systems, you're less secure. I contend that I can do better than you given fewer systems to focus on. Now, I'm not saying that there aren't good uses for a DMZ. There are. Exchange just isn't one of them. -----Original Message----- From: Jon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Thursday, June 06, 2002 1:53 PM Posted To: Microsoft Exchange Conversation: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp So you'd allow "from any" to your inside boxes? That would keep me awake at night. :) > -----Original Message----- > From: Webb, Andy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 2:47 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp > > > but you're not talking about a good use of the DMZ. the DMZ should be > an end point, not a hop. it doesn't really matter where your SMTP > virus scanner sits - you should have one, I agree. but on the DMZ > doesn't really make much difference based on your loose restrictions > between the DMZ and the LAN. > > OWA also doesn't make much difference. you have to open up rpc > traffic from the DMZ to the LAN. might as well keep the DMZ more > secure and put OWA inside. relative security of the LAN is about the > same. > > now, if you want to discuss multiple physical DMZ segments, perhaps > it's more interesting, but not much. > > there's quite a lot of this discussion in the archives, by the way. > no new arguments so far. so, if you want to jump forward to the end > of the discussion, look back a couple years. > > ======================================================= > Andy Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.swinc.com > Simpler-Webb, Inc. Austin, TX 512-322-0071 > -- Eating XXX Chili at Texas Chili Parlor since 1989 -- > ======================================================= > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Posted At: Thursday, June 06, 2002 1:30 PM > Posted To: Microsoft Exchange > Conversation: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp > Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp > > > Perhaps I shouldn't have used the term "rule", but rather perhaps "a > good security practice." It's better to let the kiddies play with a > hardened DMZ bastion then your production Exchange Server ... but I > also understand that's often not feasible for smaller companies. A > good security paradigm can take some dough. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Cook, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 2:18 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp > > > > > > Seems a little rash mr. butler, a lot of small companies use the > > scenario presented by Rob Ellis originally. A firewall, a good > > hardware one anyway is great protection if used effectively. OWA > > with ssl is a good and secure solution, so I'm curious as to why you > > believe that it's a "rule" to use a dmz? > > > > > > Jason Cook > > J.H. Ellwood and Associates > > Network Administrator > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Rob Ellis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 1:06 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp > > > > No, not remote users, server smtp traffic. > > > > We are proposing citrix full desktop, OWA for some remote users, no > > POP/smtp access for end users. > > > > The Webshield I mentioned is as you say, part of TVD. > > > > Our design sounds very much like your setup. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Rob Ellis > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 06 June 2002 18:49 > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp > > > > Ill throw in .02 > > > > Assuming you are referring to allowing remote users to get their > > e-mail. > > > > I'm doing the OWA thing for "remote/roaming" users. > > I do some Citrix for full desktops. > > I do NOT allow users to connect to the exch box at this time via > > SMTP/POP. > > > > I do at this time use the Simple Webshield product bundled with the > > NIA/Mcafee TVD suite. It does reside on it's own machine. > > so Internet smtp > webshield > Exch. > > yes the webshield sit's before Exch box. > > Yes it provides me with an additional layer of pre exch virus > > protection...works ok yes it also provides some prefiltering > > on attachments...sucks...does not go any deeper the first > > level i.e. FWD> FWD it will miss. > > Note: Their full blown product webshield APP is supposed to > > work well..no exp with it, Ill keep my opinions to myself.. > > > > If I had to let user(s) directly get to either port 110/POP and > > port25/smtp to do their e-mail... > > 1.) I would not ..thats me.. > > 2.) Forced too only via some secure connection like a VPN. > > > > bill > > > > PS for those interested I run the AV product to at the file level > > and scan all files on the exchange box with no exceptions. > > ;-) > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bendall, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 1:38 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp > > > > > > Okay I'll add another spanner to your works, I would advise an SMTP > > relay server on your DMZ but I really wouldn't use McAfee Webshield. > > Why I hear you cry for one it is pretty bad at blocking viruses and > > two we have had no end of problems with it crashing or not sending > > to certain domains when it gets a DAT update. Why not use the SMTP > > component of IIS as your SMTP relay server and then use ScanMail or > > Antigen on your Exchange server. Either that or use someone like > > MessageLabs to outsource your antivirus too. > > > > Regards, > > > > Paul > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Rob Ellis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 06 June 2002 18:26 > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp > > > > > > Ok, I've got a couple of scenarios, which of them is the > least risky? > > > > Exchange 2000 mailbox server on the LAN, accepting/making > > connections using SMTP through a firewall to the internet > > > > Exchange 2000 mailbox server on the LAN, accepting SSL secured OWA > > connections from the internet, again, protected by a firewall. > > > > > > Basically I am being told I may have to do both with the same box, > > but I'd rather have the smtp traffic going through a DMZ based > > gateway running McAfee Webshield, and let the OWA clients come into > > the internal box over SSL (which I see as less of a risk than > > opening up port 25. > > > > If you had to choose one of the 2 above scenarios, which > would it be? > > > > Regards, > > > > Rob Ellis > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > If you have received this e-mail in error or wish to read our e-mail > > disclaimer statement and monitoring policy, please refer to > > http://www.drkw.com/disc/email/ or contact the sender. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
