RE: [FW1] New worm on the road?

ahhh orbs died , due to legal ramifications http://slashdot.org/articles/01/07/02/1540210.shtml http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,44876,00.html something to think about be

RE: [FW1] New worm on the road?

For NT shops: I have forced all that http ftp traffic via a proxy (MS Proxy) that requires authentication against the NT domain. Based on the theory that any compromise will use a local machine account and therefore either a) not use the proxy and try going out the firewall or b) use the proxy an

[FW1] FW-1 on NT/2000 tip #7475532

Ensure "disable routing until firewall-1 is running" is checked. It can take a minute for the FW-1 to kick in and that is about 59.999 seconds too long to avoid any virii pinging on in. And if you think you have that box checked, check again. Not that I am talking from experience at all.

RE: [FW1] RE: Firewall attacked by IIS servers!

We had our NT FW-1 run out of virtual memory due to Code red attacks. A muck up on our part rather than NT, I mean who would only put a 127MB swapfile on FW1.. gr cheers Dean -Original Message- From: Mike Glassman - Admin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 14 August 2001

RE: [FW1] Why is log viewer so lame ?!

Try using the page down button rather than the scroll bar on the right. This had me confused for a while. regards Dean -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, 13 August 2001 11:46 p.m. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [FW1] Why is log viewe

[FW1] new checkpoint security flaw with RDP

http://www.checkpoint.com/techsupport/alerts/ I for one did not know this handy page existed on checkpoints site regards dean *** This e-mail is not an official statement of the Waikato Regional Council unless otherwise stated. Visit our w

RE: [FW1] Websense alternatives...

www.mailsweeper.com www.mailmarshal.com trend www.antivirus.com not familiar with nokia boxen Why not put websense on another box? those listed above will need to be on another box. regards dean -Original Message- From: Preston Jeffares [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, 7 July

RE: [FW1] NT Printing through Firewall-1

A thought, FW1 by default does not allow any ports between 1 - 1024 to be used *even* if you have any defined as a rule. This is typically seen with ftp sessions that transfer a lot of files, they end up using that range and the connection is dropped It is possible that as part of the print

RE: [FW1] lockdown NT

Lets not go there, nothing grows on that path and it is too well worn. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 4 April 2001 10:21 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Don Leeper Subject: Re: [FW1] lockdown NT Hmmm, why would y

RE: [FW1] Prompt-less authentication for Web access

Semi independant , depends on "agents" available: Meta/IP (expensive) NT only and must use IE: MS Proxy (ISA server) (cheap) NT Only??: CSM Proxy (cheap) Carric may be able to help here?? Carric - you run CSM don't you? LDAP could be an option, have not tried it regards Dean -Original

RE: [FW1] Daylight Saving Time

http://www.internetnews.com/wd-news/article/0,,10_728641,00.html Sounds like it? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 4 April 2001 1:37 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [FW1] Daylight Saving

RE: [FW1] Addendum: Daylight Saving Time

http://www.internetnews.com/wd-news/article/0,,10_728641,00.html Sounds like it? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 3 April 2001 9:34 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FW1] Addendum: Daylight Saving Time Interestingly, I noticed the

RE: [FW1] Sendmail Alert Setup on NT????

When doing this at the command line, sendmail is probably expecting input from the keyboard. Type sendmail -s (subject) -t (address) -f (sender@firewall) (dest@mail) Type some words in , hit enter, type a period ( . ) , hit enter. It should come back to the command prompt. checkout http://ww

RE: [FW1] Security Warning!!!

Mcafee have it listed (multiple versions) if you search on sub7 here. http://vil.nai.com/VIL/default.asp NAV http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/backdoor.subseven.html Ei

RE: [FW1] Mails stucked in Firewall Spool Directory

Which version of FW1 and service pack level , plus version of interscan? I personally try to avoid using FW1 as mail gateway because of this sort of ongoing problem. Have a look at http://www.phoneboy.com/fw1/faq/0349.html and have a look at http://www.phoneboy.com/fw1/ and search on security

RE: [FW1] User auth question

some some quick thoughts You need to have another group with the non x-limited users in it. You could use LDAP off another and internal ldap server to achieve this rather than type all in. Also have a read on the negate option when adding a group to the rule -Original Message- From: A

RE: [FW1] Re: Nokia vs NT (and solaris, just for kicks)

Installing package. We only run FW-1 on the firewall. that would be our policy no matter what OS it was. We do not have services that have mysteriously stopped I do not need a hot rod in my environment a 4 door sedan is fine, i am not image critical. Cost NT US$350, no CALs required About the

RE: [FW1] Nokia vs. NT

Thanks for the info Mark, some stats and test plan of what you did would be handy one day, as it is hard to find such performance data. But I am sure you've got better things to do :-) cheers Dean > > The only way you are going to get an oranges and oranges > comparison is by using the same box

RE: [FW1] Nokia vs. NT

The "freeness" of it is of minimal concern, as is the cheapness of NT compared to the others. It is fine to have a dragster but it may only have one use. to go fast in a straight line. Linux may be king for speed but it may not be king when all the other business requirements are included

RE: [FW1] Very strange mail issue..

sam spade at www.samspade.org is a handy tool as well. Give us the real domain names and perhaps we can help. It is very hard to shoot a black cat in a darkened room and I am getting deja vu here. -Original Message- From: Ned Fleming [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, 16 February

RE: [FW1] More network neighborhood browsing questions

If there is a network card in the PC ensure that tcp is not bound to the network card or that there are no settings in the tcp properties for the network card. This can impact on dialup and WINS settings ,default gateway dns etc. make sure these are all defined in the properties for the dialup co

RE: [FW1] Unbaised Firewall-1 vs Pix Reviews ??

Not knowing IPF.. How does ipf etc handle services like oracle8 or netmeeting, secureremote equivilent, OSPEC third party equivilents? Price is never $0, can you say your time spent on each is equal, now that you know both? Which took longer for you to learn? What was your background in

RE: [FW1] Unbaised Firewall-1 vs Pix Reviews ??

No but here is a biased one :-) http://www.roble.com/docs/fw1_or_pix.html The comparison is old and some bad things about fw1 are fixed in 4.1 Check the archives on the subject "PIX vs. CheckPoint" for the thread relating to the article at www.securepoint.com regards Dean -Original Messa

RE: [FW1] Erratic Performance on NT

whilst I fo not have a solution See http://www.phoneboy.com/fw1/ and to cover that sp for what version see http://www.phoneboy.com/fw1/faq/0359.html Rahter than try and fix the problem on 4.0 upgrade to 4.1 , you have a few potential security holes on your current system -Original Message

[FW1] RE: Web Surfing Authentication using NT Domains

1) look at ms proxy server or CSM proxy if all that you are wanting to authenticate is outbound http/https/ftp browsing. These will provide transparent authentication -> Performance problems and not transparent. --> is transparent for ie on ms proxy with WinX client. I use this. Performance i

RE: [FW1] If a single firewall with 3 NIC's a considered a DMZ?

ublic web servers are out You can apply all the FW1 rules to the IP addresses off the additional NICs regards Dean -Original Message- From: Brian Aust [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, 26 January 2001 4:05 PM To: Dean Cunningham; ''[EMAIL PROTECTED]' ' Subje

RE: [FW1] If a single firewall with 3 NIC's a considered a DMZ?

Hi Alan, Just to extend it a bit, there is no reason to limit your thoughts to just "a dmz". You can have multiple DMZs to keep your paranoia and your security policy happy :-) for example you could decide to put your dialup users in a separate dmz to limit their access to internal resources and

RE: [FW1] why not a bridge?

Soem thoughts have never seen the sun firewall a bridge in its purest sense,works at the ethernet address level, just a glorified repeater with some knowledge as to what segment a MAC address is on. This makes the segements and the bridge vulnerable to broadcast storms for one thing. Thi

RE: [FW1] Web Surfing Authentication using NT Domains

Some additional info, 1) look at ms proxy server or CSM proxy if all that you are wanting to authenticate is outbound http/https/ftp browsing. These will provide transparent authentication 2) Meta/Ip will provide transparent authentication, I do not think the others listed will? 3) Look at us

RE: [FW1] Is there a FAQ somewhere?

Hi Jim, Whilst not specifically nokia www.phoneboy.com/fw1 Links off there to others -Original Message- From: Jim Majorowicz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 23 January 2001 8:19 AM To: Fw-1-Mailinglist (E-mail) Subject: [FW1] Is there a FAQ s

RE: [FW1] PIX vs. CheckPoint

Can you give an example of an underlying O/S weakness, say on NT when FW1 is the only appliaction on the box. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, 18 January 2001 1:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Dean Cunningham; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject

RE: [FW1] PIX vs. CheckPoint

It is probably fairly similar to NT vs Unix "discussions" that go on in this forum. It comes down to "run what you know" and "run what you need for your business requirements" The doument quoted is old and has been inconsitantly updated. It is more of a brain dump of soemone who knows PIX and ha

RE: [FW1] PIX vs. CheckPoint

For PIX also the mailguard feature (dunno if it is turned on by default) It sniffs the smtp traffic and blocks ESMTP support, even if you have a rule set (or PIX equiv) to allow the ports. as per post to exchange mail list -Original Message- From: Kenneth Cornetet Sent: Thursday, 11 Ja

RE: TFS Delivery Failure: [FW1] Is Check Point open to suggestion s

Checkpoint does not neccesssarily look for list admin requests submitted to the list. An nice email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] requesting that the subscriber be removed as the email address is bouncing is the proper course of action to take here.(with a copy of the bounced message attached) I requeste

RE: [FW1] Best Practice?!

Another option is to have a nt domain or domains in the dmz(s). I do not like the thought of using username and passwords that are the same as internal. You can establish one way trusts with your internal nt domain so that the dmz(s) domain(s) trust the internal but not the other way around. I

RE: [FW1] Opinion: Blocking hotmail, etc?

It's called "treating adults like adults" but when they behave like children, you try to make them grow up, if they don't you treat them like children. I prefer the "Adult" approach, but even then you need to do regular audits to ensure compliance and to cover the company should it hit the fan.

RE: [FW1] Opinion: Blocking hotmail, etc?

If you have a nat environment, try it out and tell us. I don't do nat, otherwise I would of found outfor you. I would expect the gateway address is used for that very reason. regard dean -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, 14 January 2001

[FW1] FYI: SecureRemote32 fw4.1 sp3 and Win2k IAS

I little snippet I picked up on MS newsgroup posted by MS, thought may be of some use to some of you in the future Q283894 might not be available just yet > Problem: > I have Checkpoint SecureRemote32 client.. which does IPSEC to my Checkpoint > Firewall ver 4.x SP3 (latest) this then forwards

RE: [FW1] I am searching a Windows tool that behaves as a RADIUS client - for testing purposes.

Came accross this a while ago , never tried it http://www.nttacplus.com/download/radping.cfm -Original Message- From: Patrick Coomans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, 11 January 2001 9:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FW1

RE: [FW1] RE: Netmeeting

a decent directory service we could use or where I can find information on setting up our own directory server? Thanks, Michelle -Original Message- From: Dean Cunningham [ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 2:14 PM To: '[EMA

Netmeeting (Was: [FW1] Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 13:37:36 -0800)

this any use? http://www.phoneboy.com/fw1/faq/0312.html -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 13:26 To: [EMAIL PROTEC

RE: [FW1] pop3 gateway

Question would be best answered on the exchange mailing list http://ls.swynk.com there are a few thousand exchange admins on the list. But before posting check here first. http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm They get a bit grumpy if you have not checked here first before posting. I thin

RE: [FW1] Mail scanning solutions

Trend Interscan with e-manager http://www.antivirus.com mimesweeper http://www.mimesweeper.com (windows box tho :-) and non CVP ) Mimesweeper is a great product, don't let your anti windows bias get the better of you without first looking at it :-) With mimesweeper you just make it the MX gat

RE: [FW1] 4.1 SP3 is here...any takers?

IS this the solution?? http://www.phoneboy.com/fw1/faq/0106.html An FTP session by default will eventually use ports that fw1 will block. Each command or file transfer uses another couple of ports. I have aprocess that ftp's 1000's of files every hour through the firewall and it would break. S

RE: [FW1] Am I really under attack?

I thought the SMTP security server on the firewall could strip the headers? Just forward all mail from exchange to the security server and let it do it's thing? See Page 123 to 128 of Managing FW1 with the windows GUI User Guide -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL

RE: [FW1] Authentication of Web Sessions

FW1 supports radius (amongst others) as a means of authentication see http://www.phoneboy.com/fw1/faq/0282.html Another option is a copy of ms proxy server or csm proxy server. These provide transparent authentiation (no need for username or password) against a nt system. The difference is you p

RE: [FW1] Is it just me.....

I have mailed the list owner with details of the problem. It is probably a misconfigured pop3 server that one of us on the list has. This has been the problem in the past. regards Dean -Original Message- From: Joaquin Tejada [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, 22 December 2000 10:5

RE: [FW1] Any documentation on FW1-4.1-sp3?

Password protected, for some of us on support, we are not able to access the download site (no username/password given to us) and have to go throught the reseller. Checkpoint used to post the readme and what was fixed to this list. Don't they do it now? regards Dean -Original Message- F

RE: RE: [FW1] Will Checkpoint run on an NT Workstation?

v5, 2000 server will be the only windows platform that it can be installed on and this sort of question will go away :-) cheers Dean -Original Message- From: Anders Reed Mohn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, 14 December 2000 10:13 PM To: Dean Cunningham; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject

RE: [FW1] Product for filtering attachments??

If your concern is with SMTP mail out, Forward all mail to a SMTP content server like mimesweeper, mailmarshal ot trend/smtp If note can act a LDAP server , then I do know mimesweeper can access an LDAP server for it rules www.mimesweeper.com (don't sell it , just a user) cheers dean > -

RE: [FW1] Will Checkpoint run on an NT Workstation?

Hi, Why bother short changing an NT licence. An NT server licence is peanuts compared to a firewall installation and maintanence costs. You do not need client licences if you are not doing file and print access. See http://www.microsoft.com/NTWorkstation/news/MktBulletins/ntlicensing.asp for l

RE: [FW1] Porn filter for Linux FW-1?

"There is seldom technological answers to behavioural problems" - Ed Crowley I assume you want to block porn via?? FTP HTTP SMTP That still leaves hotmail, jpegs,gifs,mpegs and other images Content management tools like MimeSweeper range of products can be used in this area , websense I thin

RE: [FW1] Content filter for Linux FW-1?

Depends how you want to achieve it. Mimesweeper will sit on another box (NT) and do the web and mail sweeping for you , as will others. CVP / OPSEC compliant products will be able to do this as well. http://www.checkpoint.com/products/firewall-1/contsec.html Most will suggest you use another box

RE: [FW1] gas prices - chain email - good idea... NO!

Can we avoid this rubbish.. it has been proven that you just need a group of Welsh farmers to come out of the mountains and stand outside a fuel distribution center with a few pickets to bring Great Britain to it knees. I'm sure those in the US of A could do the same with out these spam tactics.

RE: [FW1] MAD rules

A search at the archives for mad may help http://msgs.securepoint.com/fw1/ -Original Message- From: Marc Jacquard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, 7 December 2000 3:26 PM To: Fw-1-Mailinglist@Lists. Us. Checkpoint. Com Subject: [FW1] MAD rules Has anyone set-up MAD on Firew

RE: [FW1] NT or Unix

The linux version has been recently ported , which has ment some stability/installation issues. It will settle down, as did other ports like NT. If performance is not an issue then NT/linux is fine. If your are expecting to use say 4 100MB cards with NAT and get high throughput then Sun or Nokia

RE: [FW1] Virus scan on traffic

Some desktop AV products like McAfee can intergrate into mail clients like outlook. This may help protect you, but they can be troublesome. Even ones that don't can protect you from virus's that modify the local disk drive , so long as the AV vendors virus signatures are kept up to date on the cl

RE: [FW1] os password and nt authentication

1) Install MS proxy server or CSM http://www.csm-usa.com/ Point the 400 users (or even all of them) Internet explorer to it and you can then contol access via NT Groups Teh firewall then only has to be setup to allow HTTP out from teh proxy server. The proxy sserver takes care of the authenticati

RE: [FW1] Service Pack 2

>From Phoneboy's site http://www.phoneboy.com/fw1/ NOTICE: If you're not running FireWall-1 4.0 SP7 (Solaris, NT, AIX, HPUX, Linux), FireWall-1 4.0 SP5 build 13 (IPSO), or FireWall-1 4.1 SP2 (all platforms) or later, you are vulnerable to a number of security is

RE: [FW1] IAS + w2k

This may be of some help for people. I hang out in the news://news.microsoft.com microsoft.public.internet.radius newsgroup. Low volume and a couple of MS guys seem to hang out there. Just do not expect a quick response > install both IAS updates from link below mcis first then sp6a > http://w

RE: [FW1] NT Service packs

a) Have a look at http://www.phoneboy.com/fw1/ you should be at fw1 4.0 sp7 b) http://www.phoneboy.com/fw1/faq/0359.html cheers -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, 20 October 2000 5:41 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FW1] NT Service pac

RE: [FW1] RE:

been infected. Could we please avoid windows/unix digs, its boring. Dean -Original Message- From: eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, 13 October 2000 2:44 PM To: Dean Cunningham Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Re: [FW1] RE: If you will notice the extension of t

RE: [FW1] Ping of Death

Could a solution for some people be . allow anybody ping a machine on your DMZ (a 386 running tcp). This way you only have one machine potentially subject to the POD. All a ping does is check that the path to a machine is available. It cannot tell if services/daemons are running. So what ar

RE: [FW1] RE:

Um.. the mail Örjan Sjöström sent did not contain the VBS code , well at least the one sent to me did not. I think some peoples AV software is a bit sensitive at the moment and you are getting false positives. This has been quite common when AV vendors put "quick fixes" out. They tidy it up late

RE: [FW1] SMTP

Do both I use mimesweeper for smtp and just have a rule that allows port 25 in and out to mimesweeper. I have another MX record that points to the FW1 SMTP security server in case the mimesweeper box is out of action. All incoming mail that goes through the SMTP security server gets forwarded t

RE: [FW1] How do I stop being smurfed?

www.netscan.org -Original Message- From: Jonas Thambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 4 October 2000 2:53 AM To: 'Tim Gollschewsky'; Firwall-1 List Subject: RE: [FW1] How do I stop being smurfed? I better hope you're not a broadcast domain. Then you might be blacklisten.

RE: [FW1] Sharing the Printer Behind a Firewall

Hi, I would suspect using LPR/LPD would be your best bet. You will need TCP printing services on an internal NT server.(probably require a reboot) An IP address for the jetdirect card in the LP 6P When you define the printer on the server and select a port , choose add port/lpr port type in the I

RE: [FW1] NT user authentication

If you want to handle internal clients browsing the web on http https and ftp and authenticated them transparently, get a MS Proxy server , give everyone Internet explorer and point them to the proxy server. Allow the proxy sever out on htrtp/https/ftp. MSP can be easily configured to authenticat

RE: [FW1] Firewall

Hi Tony, FW-1 has that potential too , it is called a checkbox in the GUI policy editor, but true, by default it is turned off. We use Fw1 and MS Proxy, but only use MSP to act as a HTTP HTTPS/FTP proxy , not as a firewall. We get a 30% cache hit rate from it as well, so that cuts down on bandw

RE: [FW1] 4.1 & terminal server?

Looking on MS technet under an article " Leveraging Security Features in Windows 2000 for Exchange" under services in Win 2000 PortProt Service 3389 RDPTerminal Services Which is the port NT4 Terminal Server uses and that under NT4 is the only incoming port you need to open. C

RE: [FW1] Akamai bypasses WebSense, Real.com, DoubleClick and other UNWANTED TRAFFIC

Hi all, I came across this behaviour when the Americas Cup was on, another vendor was doing a similar thing. Complaining to that vendor resulted in them either changing what they did or putting us in a "do not disturb" pool. End result was no more ICMP. A thought, if you ignore the ICMP stuff (

RE: [FW1] Error : "not connected" FTP Problem

chance running into reserved ports? Each file transferred is going to use another port #, and with that many FTPs, you may be bumping into one?? Robert - - Robert P. MacDonald, Network Engineer e-Business Infrastructure G o r d o n F o o dS e r v i c e Voice: +1.616.261.7987 email: [EMAIL

[FW1] Error : "not connected" FTP Problem

I note there are a number of posts on FTP at the moment, so I thought I would throw in my little problem with FTP. FTP Client NT4 SP6 FTP Server NT4 with IIS SP6 FW 4.1 SP0 on NT4 (no NAT) We run a ftp session with an command file. It connects to the ftp server and uploads about 200 html and da

RE: [FW1] choice bw nt or linux

If you are more familiar with linux, choose linux , if not choose NT There is a current thread called "[FW1] Installing FW-1 on linux" that may be of use to you. IMHO Linux is going throughout a phase of being the newest FW1 OS platform and it will be a challenge for those that choose linux for

RE: [FW1] IRC,IDENT and Firewall-1

searchable archive at www.securepoint.com cheers -Original Message- From: John C Dury [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, 1 September 2000 5:54 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FW1] IRC,IDENT and Firewall-1 First I want to apologise if this is a topic that has been hashed over

RE: [FW1] fw-1 on NT boxes

FWIW Early versions of FW1 3.x on NT 4 would stress out on low memory <128MB which would require a reboot (say once a month) 4.1 has been in and running here for a few months requiring no reboot (I know not HA but a big improvement) No VPN no NAT , T1 link to net + 3 x 100MB segments (no huge tr

RE: [FW1] MS Exchange 5.5 to work with Checkpoint 2000

Hi John, I don't do VPN so I can't help you there. But perhaps I can help for the rest. verify you can ping the exchange server using it's ip address The lmhosts.sam is just a sample file, ( a common oops by all) it needs to be copied to lmhosts. (note the period, no file extension) in the sa

RE: [FW1] FW1 and RRAS

Hi David, In what respect? What are to trying to achieve? -Original Message- From: David Grimstone (DSLWN) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, 21 August 2000 12:38 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FW1] FW1 and RRAS A while ago I recall a discussion as to whether RRAS was suppo

RE: [FW1] Multiple questions

I understood that the security servers would bind to different CPU's, but that was about it? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 9 August 2000 3:09 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [FW1] Multiple questions [snip] 2) FW-1 doesn't take a

RE: [FW1] FW1 Support of ESMTP?

Checkout http://the.rfceditor.org/ you can seach on all the rfcs The Auth command is described in this RFC ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2554.txt Telnet to port 25 of your box and type EHLO and enter then AUTH and enter betcha it will return a "500 unknown or implemented command" If is su

RE: [FW1] Robin has left ICC

Send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] asking nicely for this person to be removed off the list -Original Message- From: Vinod P. Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, 21 July 2000 4:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [FW1] Robin has left ICC Same proble

RE: [FW1] PDCs

Yes and Yes. nbt for mapping drives (a internal dmz nbt allow) start with a internal amz any allow to prove it works first. nbt and rpc endpoint mapper for trusts between PDC's (best way is to set up a one way trust so that dmz pdc trusts internal pdc and do that with an any any rule then limit

RE: [FW1] MSExchange.

Hi, http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q155/8/31.ASP http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q259/2/40.ASP may help also checkout the archives at www.securepoint.com/fw1 -Original Message- From: Parkin, Miles [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 12 July 2

RE: [FW1] Security of NT vs Solaris

I think you answered your own question with your last sentence. FW1 is the key not NT or solaris. Also running *only* FW1 on it I think you will find the recent vulnerability's with FW-1 are FW-1 specific, not OS specific On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Stewart Hurrell wrote: > Hi Folks, > > This ha

RE: [FW1] Firewall or NT

Why are you putting the exchange server there? You seem to want the pvt users to access the exchange server in the dmz rather than putting in on the pvt networkm and allow your external users to access via OWA/imap4/pop3? -Original Message- From: Vinod P. Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED

RE: [FW1] Microsoft Terminal Server Concerns

what you are using there, some people on the list may be able to comment on the suitability of the product If you can define what is required to be accessed remotely, then there may be better , more secure ways to implement it rather than TS. regards dean cunningham > -- >

RE: [FW1] RADIUS Questions Answered

Brian, can't remember if I passed this info on or not, but I have got some good support from MS people at the newsgroup microsoft.public.internet.radius and they definitely recommend going to sp6a cheers deanc > install both IAS updates from link below mcis first then sp6a > http://www.m

RE: [FW1] Scans on Ports 33435 through 33454

Yep, can be from service providers that, when someone hits a webpage they host, they traceroute back to you to find out your physical location, then point you to the closest mirror of that site. Still worth a follow up email to the originating site if the scans are annoying you. I consider such b

RE: [FW1] groups

Have a look at meta/ip for authentication using UAM?? -Original Message- From: Ivan Fox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, 1 July 2000 1:29 AM To: Firewall-1 Subject: [FW1] groups Let's say, I have 1000 internal users, only 500 of them need to pass through a firewall to access

RE: [FW1] FTP through FW-1 with NAT

With FW4.1 sp0 i have had no problem with setting this up (i did not know it was ident, so set up an additional resource) In my case I was wanting to test the T1 microwave link we have. I successfully and repeatedly downloaded 20mb files Higher link speed may perhaps be an issue? Before I knew we

RE: [FW1] FW-1 and NT SP

http://www.phoneboy.com/fw1/faq/0359.html -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 28 June 2000 5:25 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FW1] FW-1 and NT SP I'm sure this question has been asked a million times before so I am sorry. Which

RE: [FW1] authentication from Win2k Server

Hi John, Have a look at using w2k IAS (w2k radius server) and reading http://www.phoneboy.com/fw1/auth.html http://www.phoneboy.com/fw1/faq/0282.html either that or if you just want to auth http/ftp/https then install ms proxy server or CSM proxy server. They provide transparent authentication

RE: [FW1] NT trust

If IIS machine compromised in DMZ, then there is ready access for the hacker to the SAM on the internal nt domain. Using a one way trust where the dmz domain trusts the internal domain means security has less chance of being compromised. > -- > From: Miles, David[SMTP:[EMAIL PROT

RE: [FW1] SMTP per user

A low maintanence/med cost option is something like mimesweeper, which as I understand it has LDAP intergration as does exchange 5.5 {quote from msw user guide} http://www.mimesweeper.com LDAP address lists MAILsweeper for SMTP software can use address lists built from an LDAP directory. This pro

RE: [FW1] Proxy Radius

Meta/IP Enterprise http://www.metainfo.com or http://www.checkpoint.com has a radius proxy. You also get other feature such as User to Address MApping with it. Checkpoint's news server news.checkpoint.com has a newsgroup for it cheers deanc -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ma

RE: [FW1] WARNING: Virus sent to the list and how to stop all att achments!! !

There will be no further versions of Mimesweeper for FW1. I confirmed that with their sales last week. Try their Mailsweeper/SMTP version. Other products are mailmarshal and preator -Original Message- From: Little, Craig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 20 June 2000 3:51 PM To:

RE: [FW1] hacker 194.73.175.25

18800 (FAX) 441483718891 Record last updated on 28-Feb-2000. Record expires on 20-Feb-2001. Record created on 19-Feb-1996. Database last updated on 14-Jun-2000 17:35:15 EDT. Domain servers in listed order: NS.MOREGROUP.COM 194.73.175.2 -Original Message- From:

RE: [FW1] Fw-1 with Squid

IMO for the time spent doing all that buy a copy of MS proxy and NTS, slap it on a low end pentium (hell I had it on a 486/32MB for 200 users) point your browsers to it and allow the proxy out via the firewall -Original Message- From: Chris Trudeau [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursd

RE: [FW1] hacker 194.73.175.25

1. Email a nicely (I mean nice as they don't have to help you) worded message to the people that changed the RIPE details ([EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED]) asking if the details are still are correct as the email address details don't work and you have a hacker issue. these people m

RE: [FW1] PERSONAL: Citrix Issues....

Seeing as you are only worried about http/https/ftp... Suggest you install ms proxy server (or CSM proxy) and point all users on TS to go via it. On MSP you can allow only certain NT groups or people access to each protocol. The logs out of MSP also log the username The authentication is transp

  1   2   >