Re: Belkin not-real-firewall?

Anders Arnholm wrote:
> Duane Arnold <NotMe@NotMe.com> skriver:
>
>>Anders Arnholm wrote:
>>
>>>Duane Arnold <NotMe@NotMe.com> skriver:
>>>
>>>>burnedtechie@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>one and you just have a NAT router for home usage that is using some FW
>>>>like features but is doesn't meet the definition for a network FW.
>>>>http://www.firewall-software.com/firewall_faqs/what_does_firewall_do.html
>>>
>>> A system designed to prevent unauthorized access to or from a private
>>> network.
>>
>>My Watchguard FW appliance can do every last bit of what is in that link.
>>My Linksys NAT router couldn't do every last bit of what is in that link.
>
>
> Actually the firewall definition part in that text probaly the
> nat-router does do i all cases however it's not that good written:
>
> An Internet firewall examines all traffic routed between your network
> and the Internet to see if it meets certain criteria. If it does, it
> is routed between the networks, otherwise it is stopped. A network
> firewall filters both inbound and outbound traffic.
>
> The rest of the text is more or less optional, else a firewall has to
> be an packet filter, and I can think of several possible firewalls
> that isn't packetfilters at all. What do you think of the more common
> definition of firewall: "A system designed to prevent unauthorized
> access to or from a private network."

Well what can I say about it? I didn't write it. It's good enough as far
as I am concerned.

>
> With that definition it's more easy to define what is and what isn't
> a firewall. A firewall isn't always one maching, och pice of hardware.
> Othen it's a combination of several different pices of hardware and
> software.

Yes, I know that and various solutions hardware and software can make a
total solution.

But as far as some standalone solution hardware or software, it had
better be able to do all of what's in that link I provided. Otherwise, I
don't consider it to be a FW. And I am not including PFW(s) in that
definition.

>
>
>>And the system can a combination of solutions such as routers, FW
>>appliances and computer host based solutions.
>
>
> Can then the router without the other stuff be a firewall? If it has
> some parts of the outside or inside network routed into a black-hole?

In it's simplest definition of a router separating two networks that I
have stated in a previous post in this thread, it's performing a FW
function.

>>Agreed for the most part and it *is* worth less in other situations.
>
>
> Jepp, but if could be a good woring part of the firewall if you have
> secure machines on the inside. It might be a good firewall then.

I'll agree for the most part that a router can be a viable solution
standalone or part of a total solution.

As far as secured machines behind any FW solution, that's another matter
altogether that has nothing to do with FW functionality.

Duane :)
Received on Mon May 1 01:01:24 2006