Is there any reason you are looking for a firewall and not a proxy solution?
We have almost the same setup (NT 4.0 Terminal server).  We use MS Proxy
Server to authenticate to the web and log usage by user, and a
packet-filtering firewall for outbound and inbound packet filtering.  I
think a proxy solution would better fix your problem in this case (but don't
disregard the firewall for inbound/outbound filtering!).  We have experience
with the Microsoft solution, and it does the trick.

John J. Steniger


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Jonkers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 1:53 AM
> To: Eric Samburn; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Firewall authentication & W2K Terminal Server
> 
> 
> Hey,
> 
> What you have written explains exactly what I'm experiencing, 
> and what you
> are suggesting is what I need. But is it possible to give me 
> a product that
> can do what I want.
> Some people speak of a PIX, but as far as I'm aware of my 
> problem, they will
> experience the same kind of problems. This is because, as you have
> suggested, each Browser Session on  a Terminal Server is a session on
> itself, and all data leaving the TS seems to be from only one 
> user instead
> of different users.
> Already thanks for your answers.
> 
> Andy
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eric Samburn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 2:37 AM
> Subject: RE: Firewall authentication & W2K Terminal Server
> 
> 
> > I don't want to get into application proxy / packet 
> filtering debate,
> > but think about it.
> >
> > The TS is on the internal network behind the firewall.
> > Staff are logged into the TS and startup their instance of browser.
> >
> > >From the firewall's perspective, the traffic is TCP. The 
> data packets
> will
> > only provides src addr, src port, dest addr, dest port. Since all
> > connections are from the same TS, there is no way a packet filtering
> > firewall can distinguish which connection belong to which user.
> > What you need is a http proxy. Some firewall provides a 
> http proxy that
> > support proxy "Basic Authentication" (the one specified in the http
> > standard).
> >
> > That way you can control and log all web surfing usage.
> >
> > Alternatively, you put a http proxy on the internal network, and the
> > firewall is configured to ONLY allow the proxy server to go the Net.
> > And all users from the TS need to config their browser to 
> use the proxy
> for
> > web surfing.
> >
> > I just can't see how a packet filtering firewall can solve 
> this problem.
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: "Kuff, Hal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >To: "'Clark, Steve'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'"
> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >Subject: RE: Firewall authentication & W2K Terminal Server
> > >Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 19:18:54 -0500
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >     This is indeed an old and anoying issue... we suffer 
> as well... it's
> > >almost impossible to identify what session on a TSE 
> machine maps into a
> > >session on a PIX.. we're interested as well.
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Andy Jonkers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > >Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 5:39 PM
> > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >Subject: Firewall authentication & W2K Terminal Server
> > >
> > >Hey,
> > >
> > >I'm looking for a firewall, which can give me a solution 
> for the problem
> > >I'll be describing.
> > >
> > >I've got a Windows 2000 Terminal Server, and the Terminal 
> Server clients
> > >can
> > >browse the Internet using their session. However, they need to be
> > >authenticated by a firewall appliance before they are 
> allowed, and their
> > >activity needs be logged on a user basis.
> > >
> > >The firewall I'm using testing for the moment -WatchGuard 
> Firebox II-
> > >cannot
> > >do what I want. Once a Terminal Server user authenticates 
> successfully,
> all
> > >other are allowed. This is because my WatchGuard 
> dynamically changes the
> > >ACLs, because of the successfull authentication, and 
> allows Internet
> access
> > >originated from the Terminal Server Source IP. 
> Additionally, it cannot
> log
> > >on a user basis, as far as my WatchGuard is concerned it 
> comes from the
> > >Terminal Server.
> > >I've also tested the Nortel Contivity Instant Internet 
> Gateway, and they
> > >have the same problem as above.
> > >During my CheckPoint Firewall-1 training, I've asked the 
> same question.
> The
> > >Certified Instructor told me it wasn't possible on CP 
> FW-1, for the same
> > >reasons as described above. However, I didn't have the 
> opportunity to
> test
> > >it so far.
> > >
> > >Does anyone know a firewall which can perform what I want? 
> And if yes,
> can
> > >he or she describe how it is done? Any help is welcome, 
> and I thank you
> for
> > >the answer(s) to my question.
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >Andy JONKERS
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at 
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
> _______________________________________________
> Firewalls mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.gnac.net/mailman/listinfo/firewalls
>

_______________________________________________
Firewalls mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnac.net/mailman/listinfo/firewalls
_______________________________________________
Firewalls mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnac.net/mailman/listinfo/firewalls

Reply via email to