Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 22 Apr 1999 23:47:07 -0400 (EDT)
From:      "James A. Mutter" <jmutter@netwalk.com>
To:        Adam Ulmer <ulmer@ulmer.iserver.net>
Cc:        iratus@home.com, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Security
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.05.9904222342120.417-100000@insomnia.local.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.95.990422165349.17653C-100000@ulmer.iserver.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On Thu, 22 Apr 1999, Adam Ulmer wrote:

:instead of telnet/rsh and ftp.  If you are paranoid, use tcp-wrappers,
:disable remote root logins, etc.  A firewall is NOT automatic protection. 

True, a firewall is not automatic protection.  However, a well
configured firewall (it's really not that difficult) is always a
preferable solution to tcp-wrappers.

Assuming I'm Joe-ScriptKiddie, if I attempt to attack your machine and
your running tcp-wrappers I can initiate a connection, a socket level
connection with your box.  Initiate enough of these consecutively and
I imagine that some type of DOS is right around the corner.  

Imagine the same situation with a firewall.  I never got a true
connection with your machine (bad packets are conveniently redirected
to /dev/null), I never get the opportunity to fire off 1000 processes
of tcpd, your box is in better shape because of it.

Just my $0.02, I've used both, I won't _ever_ go back to tcp-wrappers.




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9904222342120.417-100000>