Agreed.
SNMP for firewall management is weak.

but not for the NetGAP, and Adminiweb.
it used to show stats, graphs, analaysis. change a few definitions,
(interfaces management) that's it.

it's not SpearHead's app to set the policy at all! it's just an addon.

Thanks for all the help ben.

p.s
Denmark & Senegal - 1:1 by now...

-Shay Hugi
-Mpthrill.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Nagy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Shay Hugi'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 9:55 AM
Subject: RE: SNMP firewall management


> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Shay Hugi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> [...]
> > thread?
> > um...
> > "Um, did you _read_ the thread?"
> >
> > Hello? i created this thread... Take a good look.
>
> Oh, "Hello?" is it? Well, I _was_ being polite, but...
>
> What I was implying is that it's obvious that being able to string
> together an email message doesn't imply an ability to carefully read and
> think about the replies to the thread.
>
> > (the DDM is
> > just an example for a GOOD snmp management system via web
> > environment)
>
> Based on what evidence?
>
> > Yeah.. I would manage a firewall under SNMP, if
> > i define a specific internal IP to be the NMS.
>
> Some people peirce their genitals, too. Please read about UDP, network
> sniffing and IP spoofing.
>
> > and if you think it's not secured let me give you the URL for
> > the management server (i'll map a new nat entry, so the
> > management system will be available for you, from my local
> > lan). that already HAVE the ability to manage the firewall.
> >
> > tell me what flaws you've managed to find. (if You'll ever know the
> > password)
>
> In the first place you're a lunatic for making such an offer, and in the
> second, why would you expect random people on the 'net to do your
> security testing for you? There is more to security than passwords,
> young padawan.
>
> > -Shay Hugi
> > -Mpthrill.com
> [...]
>
> If you think that you can offer some serious evidence for the durability
> of managing firewalls via SNMP (which, IMNSHO is crazy) then feel free
> to continue this discussion. As it is all you've done is assert that one
> particular product, for a specific market, which is designed to manage
> cable modems, uses SNMP and is "good". This is me waving my index finger
> in little circles. *wave wave wave*
>
> SNMP doesn't offer confidentiality, is brittle against concerted attack,
> runs on UDP which makes spoofing trivial, and is so complex that a large
> proportion of the SNMP implementations have had problems recently (and
> they ran fine and were considered "good" for years). In addition, to
> manage any firewall you need an app designed specifically for it (to
> handle all the set requirements) which puts you right back in the
> "specialised app" camp, except using probably the worst communications
> channel anyone could think of - I mean _damn_ I'd rather use telnet than
> SNMP - at least it's TCP which makes it harder to spoof!
>
> I don't think there's any doubt that SNMP is a really bad choice for a
> communications channel between a management station and a firewall. The
> fact that something that is essentially an Enterprise manager for
> completely different products with different needs can have firewall
> management tacked on somehow doesn't make it a good way to approach what
> was, after all, a specific problem, viz remote firewall management.
>
> I _really_ must go and watch the rest of Senegal v Denmark.
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Ben Nagy
> Network Security Specialist
> Mb: TBA  PGP Key ID: 0x1A86E304
>
>

_______________________________________________
Firewalls mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For Account Management (unsubscribe, get/change password, etc) Please go to:
http://lists.gnac.net/mailman/listinfo/firewalls

Reply via email to