David Lang writes:
 > although if your firwall is paranoid enough there can be a limit to what
 > can be done over this compramised connection.
 > 
 > for example if you have a raptor firewall the messages back and forth must
 > be valid http, it's extremely hard to type at a command prompt and have
 > valid http in both directions be the result.
 
Not with an appropriately hacked netcat client/server... or even a
basic perl script, perhaps an httpd-deamon that is designed to catch
filter http for commands ;-)


 > David Lang
 > 
 >  On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, Paul Cardon wrote:
 > 
 > > Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 10:55:03 -0500
 > > From: Paul Cardon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 > > To: Kelly Slavens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 > > Subject: Re: Configuration Arguments... In House...
 > >
 > > Kelly Slavens wrote:
 > > >
 > > >          I have a situation where I have a Server, which will host web
 > > > content from "Internal" Data to the external world. This Server Needs only
 > > > have web services accessible to the outside world beyond our network. Our
 > > > current configuration is a Cisco Hardware Nat/Router Packet filter directly
 > > > connected to the Internet connection. Connected to that is our MSProx2.0
 > > > (Being replaced with ISA Server soon)... One individual wishes to place this
 > > > new web server directly behind the NAT alongside the Prox, With a so called
 > > > "one way" push only network connection to the internal network. This seems
 > > > like a bad idea to me. My suggestion was Place the Web server behind the
 > > > prox and use Reverse prox to redirect all web traffic to only this single
 > > > internal Web server. This to me seems to be more secure than a second
 > > > machine sitting in the DMZ with a connection to the internal network.
 > >
 > > With the web server behind the Proxy, if the web server is compromised
 > > (eg. IIS Unicode vulnerability) then the entire internal network is open
 > > to the attacker.  The other configuration is better but it isn't the
 > > only solution.
 > >
 > > -paul
 > > -
 > > [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
 > > "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
 > >
 > -
 > [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
 > "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]

-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]

Reply via email to