Re: Windows 2003 Packet Filter vs Firewall
- From: "Frankster" <Frank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2005 11:59:38 -0600
In order to judge "efficiency" we would have to know much much more.
Basically you would have post your entire security policy (I know you
probably don't have one) and your operational requirements and your network
design.
But...
A firewall (yes, a real firewall, not a simple NAT device router) can
inspect the actual protocol and data on a given port and you can make rules
to allow/disallow access in either direction based on port "content", source
and destination addresses, usersIDs in some cases, and more, not just ports.
W2K3 does just ports.
-Frank
"MrDom" <mr_dom_is@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1125756000.384302.35080@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Just wondered if any one could throw some light on this:
>
> Basically which was is best to have?, Windows 2003 TCP/IP Filtering
> running and only allowing traffic on selected ports, or the Firewall
>
> Which is more efficent?
>
> Thanks
>
.
- References:
- Windows 2003 Packet Filter vs Firewall
- From: MrDom
- Windows 2003 Packet Filter vs Firewall
- Prev by Date: Re: Windows 2003 Packet Filter vs Firewall
- Next by Date: w3k server
- Previous by thread: Re: Windows 2003 Packet Filter vs Firewall
- Next by thread: w3k server
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
