Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | RE: Cisco 836 Firewall |
|---|---|
| Date: | Thu, 26 Aug 2004 08:31:54 -0400 |
I'm not familiar with the 836, but I have used the 800 series routers and IOS. If you're permitting traffic out on a single IP (PAT) and nothing inbound, your internal network is reasonably secure. The other thing you'll want to do is secure the router itself. The easiest way to do this is to apply an access list to the outside interface which denies telnet (tcp/23) and ssh (tcp/22) to all inbound traffic. In addition to that, I would suggest turning off any small-servers which are running on the router as well as the web configuration interface (assuming you're using command line). Also, if you're not using SNMP, I'd also turn that off. If you are using the web interface and/or SNMP, then I'd include those in your access list for telnet and ssh. Another good idea is to throw away any RFC1918 IP addresses which appear on your outside interface. This protects your inside network (assuming you're using RFC1918 there) from being spoofed from the outside world. Basically the idea you're trying to accomplish is to drop any packets from the outside world that could potentially be those coming from an intruder. And by doing this on your outside interface, you're dropping the packets before they could even reach the service for which they're destined. Hope that helps, Roy _____ From: Daniel Benden [mailto:DanielBenden@dbedvtkserver.de] Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 4:03 PM To: firewalls@securityfocus.com Subject: Cisco 836 Firewall Hello, does anybody know a good and secure Setup for a CISCO 836 integrated firewall? As of my knowledge, I dont need a firewall, when using dynamic nat. All PCs use one ip to the internet, and no global to local IP mappings were added, so the network should not be attackable from the outside. AM I right with this? Thans in Advance Mit freundlichen Grüßen Daniel Benden -- Daniel Benden EDV- und TK-Consulting Hahnenkamp 6 52445 Titz Deutschland Tel: +49 (0) 2164 7027-0 Fax: +49 (0) 2164 7027-10 24h Service: +49 (0) 2164 7027-19 ************************************************************* This message, including any attachments, may contain confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and may be protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by e-mail or telephone immediately, and then immediately delete this message. Any disclosure, copying or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, by any unintended recipient is strictly prohibited.
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RE: Better way to do VLAN in Linux, Kidder, Roy |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: x.25 link running HDLC does not need firewall?, Fetch, Brandon |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: Cisco 836 Firewall, Phil Waller |
| Next by Thread: | RE: Cisco 836 Firewall, loloinfo |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |