<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Exchange Server Pro &#187; Cisco Pix</title>
	<atom:link href="http://exchangeserverpro.com/tag/cisco-pix/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://exchangeserverpro.com</link>
	<description>Microsoft Exchange Server news, tips, tricks and tutorials</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 12:02:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Tom Shinder on “hardware” firewalls</title>
		<link>http://exchangeserverpro.com/tom-shinder-on-hardware-firewalls</link>
		<comments>http://exchangeserverpro.com/tom-shinder-on-hardware-firewalls#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 04:19:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Paul Cunningham</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cisco Pix]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Firewalls]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISA 2004]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISA 2006]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISA Server]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OpenBSD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.capslockassassin.com/2007/08/31/tom-shinder-on-hardware-firewalls/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tom Shinder of ISAServer.org takes an amusing shot at the myth in some circles that a &#8220;hardware&#8221; firewall or &#8220;firewall appliance&#8221; offers more security than a Microsoft ISA Server firewall. I was drawn to a particular quote in his article about the relative security of ISA Server to other popular firewalls in the context of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tom Shinder of <a href="http://www.isaserver.org" title="Tom Shinder's ISAServer.org">ISAServer.org</a> takes an <a href="http://blogs.isaserver.org/shinder/2007/08/29/exchange-deployment-and-isa-firewall-nightmare-scenarios-getting-to-know-the-nightmare-on-exchange-street-and-hork-mode-sandwich-scenarios/" title="Exchange Deployment and ISA Firewall Nightmare Scenarios — Getting to Know the ">amusing shot </a>at the myth in some circles that a &#8220;hardware&#8221; firewall or &#8220;firewall appliance&#8221; offers more security than a Microsoft ISA Server firewall.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.exchangeserverpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/shinderonfirewalls.jpg" title="Tom Shinder on “Hardware” firewalls"><img src="http://www.exchangeserverpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/shinderonfirewalls.jpg" alt="Tom Shinder on “Hardware” firewalls" /></a></p>
<p>I was drawn to a particular quote in his article about the relative security of ISA Server to other popular firewalls in the context of the number of reported security vulnerabilities for each product.</p>
<blockquote><p>A quick look at <a href="http://www.secunia.com/" title="Secunia.com"><font color="#003399">www.secunia.com</font></a> shows that the ISA Firewall (2004 and 2006) have no active security issues. Compare this with any “hardware” firewall and you will see that the ISA Firewall is more secure than just about any hardware firewall.</p></blockquote>
<p>There are a lot of firewall appliances out there so I didn&#8217;t do an exhaustive search of their stats on Secunia, but I did take a look at the stats for ISA Server, Cisco Pix, and OpenBSD as those are the three firewalls I am most familiar with in my professional life.</p>
<p><strong>ISA Server</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.exchangeserverpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/secunia_isa2004.JPG" title="secunia_isa2004.JPG"><img src="http://www.exchangeserverpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/secunia_isa2004.thumbnail.JPG" alt="secunia_isa2004.JPG" /></a><a href="http://www.exchangeserverpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/secunia_isa2006.JPG" title="secunia_isa2006.JPG"><img src="http://www.exchangeserverpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/secunia_isa2006.thumbnail.JPG" alt="secunia_isa2006.JPG" /></a></p>
<p><strong>Cisco Pix</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.exchangeserverpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/secunia_pix6.JPG" title="secunia_pix6.JPG"><img src="http://www.exchangeserverpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/secunia_pix6.thumbnail.JPG" alt="secunia_pix6.JPG" /></a><a href="http://www.exchangeserverpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/secunia_pix7.JPG" title="secunia_pix7.JPG"><img src="http://www.exchangeserverpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/secunia_pix7.thumbnail.JPG" alt="secunia_pix7.JPG" /></a></p>
<p><strong>OpenBSD</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.exchangeserverpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/secunia_obsd3.JPG" title="secunia_obsd3.JPG"><img src="http://www.exchangeserverpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/secunia_obsd3.thumbnail.JPG" alt="secunia_obsd3.JPG" /></a><a href="http://www.exchangeserverpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/secunia_pix71.JPG" title="secunia_pix71.JPG"><img src="http://www.exchangeserverpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/secunia_pix71.thumbnail.JPG" alt="secunia_pix71.JPG" /></a></p>
<p>I found those numbers to be pretty interesting.  It is not unusual to have a customer request that a two-tiered firewall infrastructure be implemented on their environment.  Often this means they request that some type of &#8220;appliance&#8221;, be that a Cisco Pix or some other third party box painted red and given a secure sounding name, be placed between the internet and the ISA Server that we are implementing for them.  Sometimes this is based on the principle of defense in depth, whereas other times it is based on a false belief that a product from Microsoft couldn&#8217;t possibly be secure.  Maybe if they saw the stats above they would think otherwise.</p>
<h3  class="related_post_title">Related posts:</h3><ul class="related_post"><li><a href="http://exchangeserverpro.com/well-designed-security-systems-fail-gracefully-sonicwall-does-not" title="Well-designed security systems fail gracefully, SonicWALL does not">Well-designed security systems fail gracefully, SonicWALL does not</a></li><li><a href="http://exchangeserverpro.com/microsoft-exam-70-350-implementing-microsoft-internet-security-and-acceleration-isa-server-2004" title="Microsoft Exam 70-350: Implementing Microsoft Internet Security and Acceleration (ISA) Server 2004">Microsoft Exam 70-350: Implementing Microsoft Internet Security and Acceleration (ISA) Server 2004</a></li><li><a href="http://exchangeserverpro.com/security-hole-found-in-openbsd" title="Security hole found in OpenBSD">Security hole found in OpenBSD</a></li><li><a href="http://exchangeserverpro.com/ssl-certificate-trust-errors-for-new-thawte-certificates" title="SSL Certificate Trust Errors for New Thawte Certificates">SSL Certificate Trust Errors for New Thawte Certificates</a></li><li><a href="http://exchangeserverpro.com/how-to-configure-a-relay-connector-for-exchange-server-2010" title="How to Configure a Relay Connector for Exchange Server 2010">How to Configure a Relay Connector for Exchange Server 2010</a></li></ul><hr />
<p>This article <a href="http://exchangeserverpro.com/tom-shinder-on-hardware-firewalls">Tom Shinder on “hardware” firewalls</a> is © 2007 ExchangeServerPro.com</p>
<p>Get more <a href="http://exchangeserverpro.com">Exchange Server tips</a> at <a href="http://exchangeserverpro.com">ExchangeServerPro.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://exchangeserverpro.com/tom-shinder-on-hardware-firewalls/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
