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: PIX limitations |
|---|---|
| Date: | Tue, 14 Sep 2004 20:18:35 -0500 |
Maybe it's kind of late but due to I had to go through some reading about Cisco FWSM 2.2, I've found that it DOES have a feature called FragGuard which is a protection against fragmentation.In this version of FWSM , the default fragment size is 200. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps708/products_module_configuration_guide_chapter09186a00802010d3.html Jaime Velasquez Venegas -----Original Message----- From: Cesar Farro Flores [mailto:cesar.farro@t-empresas.com.pe] Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 9:06 AM To: Brian Ford Cc: firewalls@securityfocus.com; jlebowitsch@pacbell.net; Ng Pheng Siong Subject: Re: PIX limitations Hi all , In the Manual of CISCO about FWSM http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/products/hw/switches/ps708/products_module_configuration_guide_chapter09186a00802010c1.html it shows what is the limitations of the PIX, the not feature that can not inspect all the fragments when there is fragmentation it is very bad because some exploits used fragmentation for Hide the content of the Exploit. Personally I dont recomended FWSM. CF. Brian Ford <brford@cisco.com> escribió el 11/08/2004 11:01:43 p.m.:
Ng and list; At 09:31 AM 8/10/2004 +0800, Ng Pheng Siong wrote:On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 06:18:09PM -0000, jlebowitsch@pacbell.net wrote:Does anyone knows if this is true also of Cisco PIX? As FWSM is based
on
PIX it seems likely, but i can't find documentation for this.Is FWSM really based on the PIX?Yes.PIX was produced by some company which was acquired by Cisco.Network Translation in 1995.FWSM is firewall stuff tacked onto IOS.Not exactly. The FWSM code was based on PIX v6.0. PIX code is not IOS.While PIX has an IOS-like config language, I believe it isn't IOS.True. So like I said in the other message you need to check these details
against
the PIX OS manual for the version of code you are using. FWSM was based
on
PIX OS v6.0 and details like these may have diverged between the FWSM and
the PIX appliance OS versions.Liberty for All,Brian-- Ng Pheng Siong <ngps@netmemetic.com> http://firewall.rulemaker.net -+- Cisco PIX & Netscreen Config Version Control http://sandbox.rulemaker.net/ngps -+- M2Crypto, ZServerSSL for Zope,
Blog
Brian Ford Consulting Engineer, Security & Integrity Specialist Office of Strategic Technology Planning Cisco Systems Inc. http://www.cisco.com/go/safe/ The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and not necessarily those of Cisco Systems, Inc.. This email address is transmitted from San Jose, California, U.S.A..
ForwardSourceID:NT0001917A
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Symantec Gateway Security 360 + Cisco VPN Concentrator 3030, Nicholas Hunt |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: Cisco VPN and Direcway Satellite Service, Anand Srivastava |
| Previous by Thread: | Symantec Gateway Security 360 + Cisco VPN Concentrator 3030, Nicholas Hunt |
| Next by Thread: | 1 VPN client only through PIX, Chris Tyler |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |