|
|
Subject:
Which Firewalls are suitable for protecting 5 webservers at a datacentre
Category: Computers > Security Asked by: jonhalton-ga List Price: $100.00 |
Posted:
26 Jun 2004 10:46 PDT
Expires: 26 Jul 2004 10:46 PDT Question ID: 366678 |
Which Firewalls are suitable for protecting 5 webservers (Windows and Linux)co located at a datacentre (connected to a Cisco 2950 switch). I am interested in finding info on suitable software and hardware firewalls. I would like to know the models and manufacturer and costs along with resons why they are suitable for this type of application. |
|
Subject:
Re: Which Firewalls are suitable for protecting 5 webservers at a datacentre
Answered By: tox-ga on 30 Jun 2004 00:24 PDT |
jonhalton-ga, Before I start, I would just like you to know that I am willing to work until you are completely satisfied with the answer. If you have any questions, feel free to request clarification. Based on the parameters of your configuration, I consulted a CCIE (Cisco Certified Internetwork Expert) and I have determined that there are three possible configurations for your setup. In the order from most to least optimal: placing a firewall between the switch and the outside world, placing a firewall between your servers, using a software firewall on each server and placing a firewall between your servers and the switch. As a general note, hardware firewalls tend to be much better at protecting web server configurations than software as many provide protection against SYN attacks, has SMTP and HTTP fix up protocols, etc, which software firewalls do not. The first option is the most common configuration in the business/web hosting world. Firewalls are designed to facilitate huge volumes of traffic through a few ports. The firewalls that I list should easily be able to handle the traffic to five webservers. This solution is probably the easiest to configure and maintain, and is probably the least expensive of the hardware solutions. An alternative to this solution (if you have no control over what occurs after the switch) would be to connect the servers to a high throughput hub (which is essentially a switch) which feeds into the firewall. With this solution, the firewall does not necessarily require 5 ports. In fact, it really only requires 1. (Solution #1) The second option, software, is probably not so great for your setup since you have a mix of Linux and Windows computers. This requires licensing two different pieces of software, which is more expensive than volume licensing a single piece. Also, this implies that there will be two different interfaces which may not be compatible. And just because you've patched a security hole for one piece of software, does not mean that the other piece doesn't have the same hole still exposed. This solution will probably the be the most difficult to maintain, but will be cheaper than any hardware solution. (Solution #2) The last option functions in a way similar to solution #1 and is recommended if you do not have control over what happens after the switch. Both hardware solutions work easily with both Linux and Windows, though most of the configuration software (if it has configuration software) is meant for Windows. (Solution #3) Below, I have outlined the companies providing the software/hardware, as well as a selection of software/hardware for each solution, along with my recommendation. ############################## # Solution Provider Overview # ############################## Cisco Systems ------------- Cisco Systems is probably your best bet if you are going for reliability and product support. This may sound like bias coming from a CCIE, but it is true. The amount of literature available on configuring their PIX firewalls is truly staggering (http://www.net-security.org/review.php?id=27, http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=963, http://www.enterprisenetworksandservers.com/cp/art.php/1587200678) The benefit of this is that you can become an expert on your security systems, instead of relying on a third party to configure and maintain your system setup. Cisco also releases frequent product updates, white papers, firmware upgrades and technical documentation to further ensure what you and your firewall are updated on new security developments. Offers 24x7 technical support and is the mainstay of many business/enterprise IT departments. Symantec -------- Symantec is a big developer of the software side of firewalls, though they do offer high end hardware firewall appliances. Better known for their personal/home software development. SonicWALL --------- Sonicwall is a dedicated internet security provider and has many of its firewalls featured by PC Magazine (http://www.pcmag.co.uk/Products/Hardware/1153768), Network World, and SC Magazine. They have half a million units in use worldwide in many industries including SOHO, SMB, enterprise VPN, service providers, retail/point-of-sale, education, healthcare, and government. Offers 24x7 technical support. 3Com ---- A solid company in terms of price, support and hardware. Trustix ------- Trustix provides commercial Linux business solutions, including security, web servering, anti-virus and more. They have a long list of high profile partners and customers including Shell, IBM, Toshiba, and many universities (http://trustix.com/partners/index.html). ############### # Solution #1 # ############### PIX 501 Firewall (Recommended) ------------------------------ Website: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/ps2031/index.html Manufacturer: Cisco Systems Price: $300-$500 (http://www.dealtime.com/xPC-Cisco_PIX_Firewall_501_PIX_501_BUN_K9) Ports: 4 (10/100 Mbps) Throughput: 100 Mbps Comments: Designed for small offices, the throughput on this firewall is decent and should be enough for your configuration. Some users have commented that the command line interface is slightly difficult to get used, but the large amount of literature and technical support available should easily alleviate this problem. Features (http://www.dealtime.com/xPF-Cisco_PIX_Firewall_501_PIX_501_BUN_K9). Its data sheet can be found at http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/products_data_sheet09186a0080091b18.html Model 100 Firewall ------------------ Website: http://enterprisesecurity.symantec.com/products/products.cfm?ProductID=63&EID=0 Manufacturer: Symantec Price: $300-$400 (http://www.dealtime.com/xPO-Symantec_Firewall_VPN_100_16_00_00078#fulldesc) Ports: 4 (10/100 Mbps) Throughput: 100 Mbps Comments: Recommended by PC Magazine but deemed only decent by some users (http://www.dealtime.com/xPO-Symantec_Firewall_VPN_100_16_00_00078#fulldesc) Symantec has had problems with technical support. However, their firewall appliances are quite inexpensive and if you're looking primarily at price, the 100 Firewall may be for you. Its fact sheet can be found at http://enterprisesecurity.symantec.com/content/displaypdf.cfm?pdfid=82. Office Connect VPN Firewall --------------------------- Website: http://www.3com.com/products/en_US/detail.jsp?tab=features&sku=3CR870-95&pathtype=purchase Manufacturer: 3Com Price: ~$300 (http://www.dealtime.com/xPO-3Com_OfficeConnect_VPN) Ports: 4 (10/100 Mbps) Throughput: 100 Mbps Comments: Like their company, a good investment, though I would recommend going with the PIX firewall. Its data sheet can be found at http://www.3com.com/products/en_US/detail.jsp?tab=prodspec&sku=3CR870-95&pathtype=purchase SuperStack 3 Firewall --------------------- Website: http://www.3com.com/products/en_US/detail.jsp?tab=features&pathtype=purchase&sku=3CR16110-95-US Manufacturer: 3Com Price: ~$2500-$3500 (http://www.dealtime.com/xFS?FN=Firewalls&KW=superstack+3&FD=96288) Ports: 3 (10/100 Mbps) Throughput: 190 Mbps Comments: Provides the highest throughput for firewalls in this solution category, required if you have large amounts of data being transferred. This higher end firewall also includes dual security zones, as well as highly flexible bandwidth control. Its data sheet can be found at http://www.3com.com/products/en_US/detail.jsp?tab=prodspec&sku=3CR16110-95-US&pathtype=purchase ############### # Solution #2 # ############### Trustix Enterprise Firewall (Recommended) ----------------------------------------- Website: http://firewall.trustix.com/small/ Manufacturer: Trustix Price: $270 O/S: Linux Trial Download: https://secure.comodo.net/products/LicenceSignup1a Comments: Once again, one of the few commercial applications available on Linux. If you are brave, you can also check out Linux Firewalls (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0735710996/102-2624187-6192141?v=glance) to learn how you can manually setup your own firewall on your Linux systems. Kerio WinRoute Firewall 6 (Recommended) --------------------------------------- Website: http://www.kerio.com/kwf_home.html Manufacturer: Kerio Price: $399 ($99 for subscription) O/S: Windows Trial Download: http://www.kerio.com/kwf_download.html Comments: An excellent Windows Firewall with many features from a dedicated company. It has garnered excellent reviews (http://www.kerio.com/kwf_reviews.html). Symantec Enterprise Firewall ---------------------------- Website: http://enterprisesecurity.symantec.com/products/products.cfm?ProductID=47&EID=0 Manufacturer: Symantec Price: $21 (http://shop.soft32.com/buy-B0001YXWP0-AsinSearch-us.html) O/S: Windows Comments: Symantec provides an inexpensive and easy to setup solution. Much more information can be found at http://enterprisesecurity.symantec.com/products/products.cfm?ProductID=47&EID=0. ############### # Solution #3 # ############### TZ 170 Firewall (Recommended) ----------------------------- Website: http://www.sonicwall.com/products/tz170.html#features Manufacturer: SonicWALL Price: $300-$800 (http://www.dealtime.com/xFS?FN=Firewalls&KW=TZ+170&FD=96288) Ports: 5 (10/100 Mbps) Throughput: 90 Mbps Comments: An inexpensive firewall appliance which has received excellent reviews (http://www.pcmag.co.uk/Products/Hardware/1153768). Designed for lower bandwidth systems and small companies, it features a simple and intuitive interface for fast setup. Its data sheet can be found at http://www.sonicwall.com/services/pdfs/DS_0304_TZ170.pdf. Model 200R Firewall (Recommended) --------------------------------- Website: http://enterprisesecurity.symantec.com/products/products.cfm?ProductID=63&EID=0 Manufacturer: Symantec Price: $800 (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,9781,00.asp) Ports: 8 (10/100 Mbps) Throughput: 100 Mbps Comments: This model has received rave reviews at PC magazine (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,9781,00.asp) which has also provided the excellent advice of purchasing the Symantec Firewall CPN 200 instead of the VPN to save money on the VPN software (which is not compatible with Linux). Unlike other firewalls, it also features load balancing. Configuration is easily done through a web interface. Its fact sheet can be found at http://enterprisesecurity.symantec.com/content/displaypdf.cfm?pdfid=82. PIX 515E Firewall ----------------- Website: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/ps4094/index.html Manufacturer: Cisco Systems Price: ~$5000 (http://www.dealtime.com/xFS?KW=Cisco+PIX+515&FN=Firewalls&FD=96288) Ports: 6 (10/100 Mbps) Throughput: 188 Mbps Comments: Cisco hardware tends to be fairly expensive, though many have found that it is well worth the investment. Designed for medium to small businesses, choose this firewall if you have a fair amount of traffic to your servers. Its data sheet can be found at http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/products_data_sheet09186a0080091b15.html. I hope you find this information useful. If you have any questions, feel free to post a request for clarification. Cheers, Tox-ga | |
|
|
Subject:
Re: Which Firewalls are suitable for protecting 5 webservers at a datacentre
From: forgey-ga on 30 Jun 2004 07:57 PDT |
Lots and lots of information there, but some of it is incorrect. A hardware firewall is generally the best form of security currently, but many of the reasons that are given (http fix up protocols etc.) are also available in many software based firewalls. Pix are horrible. They are disgusting to install/configure and are more switch based that firewall based. I would never recommend using a Pix, go with another firewall vendor if at all possible. My recommendations are: A Nokia appliance, a good easy to manage appliance that is based on Checkpoint Firewall-1 (the leading firewall product) and has appliances sized for very large enterprise customers right down to small business customers that are about your size. http://www.nokia.com/downloads/networks/security_products/NOK_FW_VPN_APP.pdf If you'd prefer having a server based system I would suggest going with either: Checkpoint Firewall-1 running on a server OS that you are comfortable administering (will run on Windows, Unix or Linux). www.checkpoint.com for more information. Or Symantec Enterprise Firewall (previously known as Raptor). I am not a huge fan of Raptor, but it a great firewall for small to medium businesses, is easy to manage and provides many of the 'hardware' type advantages like an HTTP/SMTP fixup protocol: http://enterprisesecurity.symantec.com/products/products.cfm?ProductID=47&EID=0 Symantec also has an appliance based box, but I have never used it so I can't comment on it: http://www.symantec.com/smallbiz/gtw/ This is not a complete list of the best firewall technologies, but for a small business/small network these are your best options. Your choice should also be based on who will be installing/managing the system. If you are going to do it yourself then make sure you get a little training beforehand on whatever system you choose to go with. If someone else will be installing/managing it then I'd find out what firewall systems that they are already comfortable managing and go with one of those systems. A firewall is only as good as the person managing it. Again, stay away from Pix! :) |
Subject:
Re: Which Firewalls are suitable for protecting 5 webservers at a datacentre
From: 98point6-ga on 30 Jun 2004 11:26 PDT |
The researcher has not bothered to check for security problems inherent in Cisco PIX firewalls. Google lists thousands of credible tech news reports documenting the secuity flaws, holes and problems that have plagued this product for years. ://www.google.com/search?q=pix+firewall+flaws The nokia appliance, good. Symantic's enterprise firewall, good. PIX, very bad. |
Subject:
Re: Which Firewalls are suitable for protecting 5 webservers at a datacentre
From: forgey-ga on 30 Jun 2004 12:12 PDT |
CCIE != Security expert. They need to know some security related information, but it is mainly focused on Cisco and the core of the CCIE is network related. Having worked with many firewall systems in large scale enterprise environments I can tell you that Pix are not a pretty firewall to work with. They have all the functionality of other firewalls but are much more difficult to manage. This is personal experience as a security consultant and firewall administrator. I will always recommend against Pix given the choice for another equal or better firewall platform, and there are definitely better platforms available for business firewalls. I am not sure I understand your point about a software firewall not being appropriate for a network of 5 computers? It is more than adequate, offers great security and ease of management. I know some very large enterprise customers with thousands of servers that are running on software based firewall structures. This is a false statement. Hardware firewalls are preferred, software firewalls offer similar security, but less robust high availability and definitely less performance. If I am ever going to recommend a firewall it is going to be a Netscreen from Juniper Networks. Hands down the best firewall out right now for performance, security and manageability. It also has some excellent High Availability components that are second to none. |
Subject:
Re: Which Firewalls are suitable for protecting 5 webservers at a datacentre
From: crypt0-ga on 11 Aug 2004 13:51 PDT |
Folks, I am actually stunned by the product specific approach being taken here. While all of the firewalls mentioned have their place, there seems to be little time and investment made in looking at issues outside of simple brand loyalty. I have to admit I am as biased about firewalls as most people but we all have our reasons - some people just drink the corporate lemonade. Given the minimal information you have been able to provide (understandable seeing as you would not want to give too much away about your environment) I would strongly suggest you consider an application proxy firewall, there are not too many good ones around, however consider the following when looking for a suitable solution: Security history - the E-Secure-IT database holds a complete record of all firewall exploits, vulnerabilities, issues and updates for the las6 few years, if you want to establish which firewall is going to give you the biggest headaches, have the most security issues, cause you to spend the most time patching and updating, and basically give you a poor cost of ownership for the money you initially spend. A high maintenance firewall is going to potentially impact a datacenter more than one that requires minimal manual intervention. If you want to see the security history of any product, get a free trial which will allow you full database access for up to a month, you will then know which products are going to keep costing you in terms of time and money after you have purchased them! Its also an early warning database, and serves to keep you ahead of emerging security issues. Price - you are securing a datacenter with multiple internal servers, dont buy a cheap firewall as you will get what you pay for :) if you must spend a few hundred on a PIX for example, use it as part of a multi-layered solution which sits between your external router and your primary firewall, which should be from another vendor (not anti-PIX specifically here, but suggesting that two different firewall product architectures will give a multi-layered approach to your security, many organisations use a combination of PIX and Checkpoint for example). Having said 'dont spend too little', I should also state 'dont spend too much', there are too many firewalls that cost an arm and a leg for doing what all the other firewalls are already doing, be aware that paying a lot of money is not necessarily going to get you the best product for your needs, paying for the badge or the brand name can inflate the cost of certain well known firewalls when they are in fact no more functional or feature rich than firewalls half the price! Functionality - securing multiple internal servers requires an APPLIANCE based approach, full stop. Preferably a platform agnostic appliance such as Borderware Firewall Servers (www.borderware.com) , running their own proprietary OS which means there are no publicly available exploits or known vulnerabilities at this time. Unlike Windows, Unix, Linux, Cisco IOS etc, who all have a long list of security offences that would make any security manager looking for a new solution quiver if they were worth their salt (or salary). In short, go with hardware, application proxy, proprietary OS etc. One final issue in this area, certain firewalls can also act as embedded servers, DNS, FTP, Web, SMTP, NTP etc, this can take some of the security worry from the Linux and Windows based servers that you are currently using and can free them up for other uses. Certification - OK I'll declare my biase here :) There is only one firewall to achieve Common Criteria EAL4+ TWICE, and with EAL5 for security vulnerability analysis, Borderware. Common Criteria certifications are based on international agreements and should be given serious consideration when reviewing firewall candidates. The Borderware MXtreme Mail Firewall is also the only EAL4+ mail gateway and security appliance in the world, so should you wish to separate out your mail security to prevent against blended mail threats, MXtreme will handle ALL mail security issues for you. Government and Military tend to lean towards this, no reason why a datacenter shouldnt have the same benefits. Both Checkpoint and PIX, and I believe Sidewinder have EAL4 certifications as well, only Borderware has the certifications without any disclaimers or limitations. (I believe PIX has EAL4 if its not using NAT) Best Fit - having said all this, you need to go into your specific requirements and get each major vendor to submit a proposal as to how they will meet the requirements of your environment. What do you want it to do? How much time and money do you want to spend patching, updating, and manually intervening? Does the product have an automated patch and update system? Does the application proxy have a stateful failover and HALO option? (most good firewalls do) Another very important question is 'do you need a certification to manage this firewall, or can it be managed remotely, if the answer to both is yes, you will be spending more money, so look at the firewalls that you dont need to sit an expensive course to be able to administer, give yourself a choice if interface, some firewalls allow you to either go straight to the command line or use a Windows type GUI, I prefer the latter but thats just me. To recap, look at security history so that you know what you may be in for, price is important, and if the business case is satisfactory you shouldnt have a problem with the funding - if you are using a firewall already, see which vendor is going to give you a competitive swapout discount. Protect your commercial and well known OS's with a 'blank' or proprietary OS gateway, eg one that cant be recognised, and make sure you use an appliance based solution. Well now I have possibly opened the lid a little further on this can of worms, I hope this has been helpful, but as a serious question, you deserve an asnwer that will benefit you the most - I stand to benefit nothing from this advice but I hate to see people influenced by well known brand names or perceived market share. |
If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by emailing us at answers-support@google.com with the question ID listed above. Thank you. |
Search Google Answers for |
Google Home - Answers FAQ - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy |