|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: [FW1] Back to the Basics
1) Yes, as far as I know. 2) That's a matter of preference. If someone compromises the firewall host (assuming they exploit a service other than FW1), and you only inspect inbound, then you have no way of preventing them from sending rogue packets out from your firewall. You could, however, argue the futility of this: If they can root out your firewall, then chances are that they're going to be making some other changes anyway. Still, eitherbound couldn't hurt if you have the hardware... Keith W. McCammon Sr. Network Engineer AdvanceMed Corporation 11710 Plaza America Drive Reston, VA 20190 Phone:Fax:Two questions that should be fairly easy.... 1) With version 4.1, is the rule to disallow communication with the firewalled gateway (Any > FW > Any > Drop > Long - typically rule No. 1 back in the day) still required? 2) Is the concensus on Eitherbound vs. Inbound still the same, i.e., that Eitherbound adds additional overhead and is not really required in most situations? TIA. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/ ============================================================================ ==== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html ============================================================================ ==== ================================================================================ To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html ================================================================================
|
||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
