LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
Home Forums Tutorials Articles Register
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Security
User Name
Password
Linux - Security This forum is for all security related questions.
Questions, tips, system compromises, firewalls, etc. are all included here.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 09-01-2004, 04:15 PM   #1
shanenin
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Rochester, MN, U.S.A
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 987

Rep: Reputation: 30
is a router firewall sufficient?


I have always used garddog to generate an iptables script for a firewall. I used to have just one computer connected directly to the internet. I am in the process of setting up three computers in a network: my main linux box, a freevo linux box, and a windows system. I now have a linksys router that uses nat. Is this suffiecient to use as my only firewall? I am not looking for ultimate security, just fairly secure. I really do not want to try and configure iptaples for all of my computers. I guess I am kind of looking for the answer, "you should be ok with just a hardware firewall"
 
Old 09-01-2004, 05:21 PM   #2
Mara
Moderator
 
Registered: Feb 2002
Location: Grenoble
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 9,696

Rep: Reputation: 232Reputation: 232Reputation: 232
It depends how the current firewall looks like. If it's quite good and you'll remember always to have unneded services off and to update your systems, it should be OK.
 
Old 09-01-2004, 09:41 PM   #3
shanenin
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Rochester, MN, U.S.A
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 987

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
I read that a router doing nat is not a firewall as I beleived. Is it incorrect to call my router a "hardware firewall". Is trusing my router to protect me any different then hooking my box directly to the internet through a modem?
 
Old 09-01-2004, 10:35 PM   #4
unixfreak
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2004
Distribution: Linux 2.4.21-0.13mdk, W2K
Posts: 412

Rep: Reputation: 30
It depends on your use of the machine. I use dial-up on a stand-alone machine so basically, a router is not needed.

But if your going to do tasks over a shared network, then of course, a hardware firewall will do very great.
 
Old 09-01-2004, 10:41 PM   #5
shanenin
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Rochester, MN, U.S.A
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 987

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
ya, but is my router doing nat a "hardware firewall" Now I am starting to dought that it is even going to help protect me.
 
Old 09-01-2004, 11:49 PM   #6
Netizen
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Texas
Distribution: Slackware and Ubuntu
Posts: 355

Rep: Reputation: 30
Google is your friend.

http://www.smallbusinesscomputing.co...le.php/3103431
 
Old 09-02-2004, 08:19 PM   #7
gundelgauk
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 168

Rep: Reputation: 30
Greetings!


Since I am currently reading up on this subject myself (NAT vs. port forwarding) I thought I'd share a few things. Note that I am in no way an expert on this and corrections are greatly appreciated. Also I am not a native English speaker so please bear with my rather blunt explanations.


Having said the above I will now elaborate:
Your router is probably doing NAT which means "Network Adress Translation".
NAT is just a different form of port forwarding or routing in general (at least as far as Linux/iptables is concerned). What your router does is supposedly this: It accepts any connections from your client machines in your LAN that are meant for the internet. It then changes (translates) the source IP adress from the original client to your actual public internet adress. This way it will seem as though all connections of your clients are initiated by your router and not the PCs in your LAN. Your router also remembers these connections. Responses from internet servers will be adressed to your router. But as the router will recognize these connections, it will retranslate the destination IP to the client PC in your LAN that established the connection originally. That way all your clients can connect to any systems they like, but to the outside world (the internet) these connections will appear as though your router has established all these connections by itself. Your router is effectively hiding your LAN from the outside world.

(By the way, what happens here is only one form of NAT, namely SNAT (=Source NAT) or Masquerading (special form of SNAT for dynamic inet IPs). There is also DNAT (=Destination NAT) which has different purposes.)

Now what happens if any machine in the internet wants to establish a connection to one of your PCs, be it a port scan, an attempt to break security via buffer overflow or breaking a password or even just a legitimate try to access some service? The outside machine tries to establish a connection with your external IP adress. Thus your router will be the receiver of the packets. However normally your router will not accept any packets for itself but it will translate the receiver's adress and route it to the client PC in your LAN which estalished the connection. As you may have noticed, as this connection is established from the outside, none of your clients has established this connection and thus your router will be unable to tell where to route this connection to and will thusly drop it.

To make a long story short (ie if your skipped my long, confused explanation ), your NAT router is bound to drop any new connections that any machine from the internet attempts to initialize with any of the PCs in your LAN. So you may feel pretty safe actually.


Beware though, there may still be security hazards if you use port forwarding. Also mind what others have said about this topic: Don't feel completely safe unless you have deactivated any services you don't really need and unless you update your systems regularly.
Another thing, and this is really important: Your hardware router is likely to have some sort of remote administration system. This may be via http, ssh or telnet. Make sure (= triple check) that you block any connections to these administration services from the internet because anyone could guess or brute force your passwords. Then all your efforts would be in vain because they could access any system in your LAN.


Again anyone is encouraged to correct or verify my claims.


Good night!
 
Old 09-02-2004, 10:29 PM   #8
shanenin
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Rochester, MN, U.S.A
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 987

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
thanks
 
  


Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Small Linux Router/firewall behind D-Link Hardware router dleidlein Linux - Networking 6 04-30-2007 05:12 AM
Whether steps taken after being hacked were sufficient? NoeticRapture Linux - Security 2 07-13-2005 05:44 PM
Are these devices sufficient for my system? kornerr Linux - General 5 06-19-2005 10:51 AM
Mandrake Firewall/router networked to US Robotics 8000A router jrzplace Linux - Networking 0 11-17-2003 04:48 PM
Will RHCE be a sufficient qualification? coolamit78 Red Hat 16 11-09-2003 09:04 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Security

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:11 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration