On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 16:22 -0600, [email protected] wrote:

> I thought that an SBC hides a lot of information because it
> specifically rewrites information that prevents the network 
> side from being understood basically

Some SBC vendors make much of this... the sipXbridge hides some things
and not others (the more you try to hide, the more you have to translate
and remember); mostly that hiding is just a side effect of being a
B2BUA, not a deliberated design.  Personally, I think that there is
little value in trying to hide things like your internal network numbers
and addresses of your major servers.  In practice, it's not at all
difficult to guess these things or find them by brute force.

It is true that our recommended deployment is to let SIP and RTP
messages flow through your firewall unmolested, which means that an
attacker has a path to your system.  If you don't do silly things like
setting all the SIP passwords to the same value, this isn't too serious
a problem.  

Ultimately, it's a tradeoff.  You can buy something that claims to
police the boundary, but that just shifts the first point of attack to
the new thing - it's still software and it's still got potential holes.
Importantly, it's going to have to modify the messages that pass through
it to be a real barrier and that means that if it doesn't do all those
changes perfectly (and trust me, the definition of perfect is a moving
target) then it's going to break something.

_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list [email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users
sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/

Reply via email to