On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Jean-Francois <jfsimon1...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi,
> "And I totally agree with you, Mixing firewall services with services
> like Web or file/print services is a recipe for disaster."
>
> True since hacking the web server is entering the firewall itself.
> But the web server, httpd, is chrooted ... so why would there be a
> problem here ?


There are ways to evade chroots, although I'm not sure how feasible they are
for OpenBSD.


> Le samedi 28 fC)vrier 2009 C  17:49 +0100, Felipe Alfaro Solana a C)crit :
> > On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Ingo Schwarze <schwa...@usta.de>
> > wrote:
> >         Hi Felipe,
> >
> >         Felipe Alfaro Solana wrote on Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 10:53:50AM
> >         +0100:
> >         > On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:13 PM, Ingo Schwarze
> >         <schwa...@usta.de> wrote:
> >
> >         >> Jean-Francois wrote on Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:08:22PM
> >         +0100:
> >
> >         >>> I actually built the following system :
> >         >>> - OpenBSD running on a standard AMD platform
> >         >>> - This box is actually used as firewall
> >         >>> - This box is also used as webserver
> >         >>> - This box is finally used as local shared drives via NFS
> >         file
> >         >>>   but only open to subnetwork through PF
> >
> >
> >         >> NFS is not designed with security in mind.  It transmits
> >         data
> >         >> unencrypted.  It has no real authentication and no real
> >         access
> >         >> control.  If is designed for strictly private networks with
> >         >> no external access that no potential attackers have access
> >         to.
> >
> >
> >         > Just to clarify,
> >
> >         On an OpenBSD list, i am talking about NFS on OpenBSD
> >         (-current
> >         and -stable), and that's NFSv3.  ;-)
> >         Of course, you are right that i could have mentioned that.
> >
> >         > NFSv4 does not necessarily transmit data in clear text.
> >         > NFSv4 allows one to use encryption and/or data
> >         authentication.
> >
> >
> >         That doesn't help the original poster because NFSv4 is not
> >         available on OpenBSD.  See
> >
> >          http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=123469849717017
> >          Peter Hessler wrote on Feb 15, 2009:
> >          "openbsd uses nfsv3 over ipv4.
> >           nfsv4 is still being worked on, but is not ready."
> >
> >
> > Well, if NFSv4 is not an option for OpenBSD, then it's clear that NFS
> > on OpenBSD is a very poor choice due to lack of proper authentication
> > and encryption :)
> >
> >         > NFSv3 and older versions do not use encryption at all,
> >         > but you can use IPSec to protect it at the network layer.
> >
> >
> >         I do not know enough about IPSec to judge whether and under
> >         which
> >         conditions it's viable, effective and efficient to secure NFS
> >         usage
> >         in an internal network that attackers have access to by using
> >         IPSec
> >         between the NFS server and each NFS client.  Maybe this could
> >         be
> >         an option.
> >
> >
> > Of course if the attacker can gain remote access to the machine, IPSec
> > is not very useful since the attacker can probably retrieve the
> > encryption keys from the kernel :)
> >
> >
> > IPSec is only useful to prevent attacks (replay, sniff, etc.) from the
> > network.
> > Thanks for pointing this out.
> >
> >
> >         But even if that's sound, which i neither claim nor deny, it's
> >         still
> >         a bad idea to run purely internal services on a firewall, no
> >         matter
> >         whether they use encrtption or not.
> >
> >
> > And I totally agree with you, Mixing firewall services with services
> > like Web or file/print services is a recipe for disaster.
>
>


--
http://www.felipe-alfaro.org/blog/disclaimer/

Reply via email to