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.




Network Security Firewalls
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: PIX question?

Subject: Re: PIX question?
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 02:49:01 -0500
On 19 Jan 2005 16:47:03 -0000, Dimitri <spy4kr@yahoo.co.kr> wrote:

I'm auditing a PIX config for version 6.3(4).  It has an inside and outside 
interface only.  The inside interface is defined with 1 physical and 2 
logical vlans.  These are nat'd to the outside.

We have a series of static routes binding the same ip on each of the vlans 
(e.g "static (inside,vlan1) ip1 ip1 netmask ....").  This part I don't 
understand very well.


Those aren't static routes, they're static NAT configurations.  

Contrary to an earlier post, the PIX *will* route traffic happily. 
You just have to tell it what to not NAT.

We've defined rules that explicitly permit access to services (eg. SMTP) from 
one vlan to > another on the same interface. We have a catalyst switch, if 
(really big IF) this can force > the vlans to route traffic to the firewall 
this might actually work.  

Not a big if at all, that's not a problem.  Just have to setup the
VLAN's properly on the switch and the firewall.


However, I am very 
sceptical that this will work and the firewall can actually police traffic 
between the vlans.   

As far as routing traffic between VLAN's on the same interface, I'm
not sure offhand if the PIX will do that.  It will not route any
traffic out the interface it comes in on, regardless of configuration,
but I don't know if that applies to the entire physical interface
(i.e. includes any configured VLAN's).

Even if it does it seems unnecessarily complex and subject to error.

Whether it's unnecessarily complex depends on the environment. 
Generally you route between VLAN's with a L3 switch, or occasionally a
router, and rarely a firewall.   It definitely adds complexity, which
increases your chances of error and problems.  By how much depends on
how skilled your admins are.  It definitely increases security. 
You'll have to analyze the positives and negatives in the context of
your environment to reach a decision on whether or not it's excessive.

Some reading material:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk389/tk689/technologies_tech_note09186a008009478e.shtml
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/products_tech_note09186a00800b6e1a.shtml
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/products_tech_note09186a0080094aad.shtml
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/iaabu/pix/pix_sw/v_63/cmdref/s.htm#wp1026694
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/iaabu/pix/pix_sw/v_63/index.htm

Regards,
-Chris

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>