Re: Network Topology
- From: "David G." <DavidG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 14:25:06 -0700
Matt,
I appreciate your help. The secureftp server will have files uploaded to it
that need to be able to be moved to a server on the internal network. I'm a
little fuzzy here, I know that because of the dmz I will be blocking all
traffic from within the DMZ to our internal network, or at least that is my
understanding, however, could a computer from within my internal network
access the secureftp server sitting on the dmz and pull the files from it?
Would that be a secure/smart implementation?
David
"Matt Gibson" wrote:
> Answers inline...
>
> > I need to be able to provide secureFTP access via SFTP2 for business to
> > business data transfers that need to take place with our partners. I have
> > a
> > server that provides this service, and I can open the port on the firewall
> > to
> > that server. However, I don't know if I should be moving the hosting
> > server
> > for this server outside of the firewall to prevent that access into our
> > internal network. SBS does not act as a firewall currently.
>
> Moving it outside your firewall depends on what access it needs to the
> inside of your network. If it's solely a filesharing server that never
> needs to talk to your internal network, then it's fine to move it out there.
> If it provides other roles, then you may want to consider the impact moving
> that server will have on those roles.
>
> > I want to harden our network security as we start to interact more with
> > other corporations. Should I purchase the premium edition of SBS? Add
> > another NIC to that server, and use it as a gateway to the internet? So it
> > would be
> >
> > 1721 Router -> Pix 506E Firewall -> SBS 2003 Premium Server -> Internal
> > Network?
>
> I (and most of the MVPs) think that this is the best way to go. You can
> leaverage the application proxying abilities of ISA to your benefit, and
> provides a back to back DMZ for you.
>
> > I have read also that it's not a good idea to have DC in a DMZ, it seems
> > that SBS was designed inherently to disregard this suggestion, and maybe
> > that's appropriate, I'm not sure that's why I'm asking.
>
> You're correct, you shouldn't have a DC in a DMZ. However, with the way SBS
> is designed, the NIC that's attached to the "DMZ" doesn't really have
> anything bound to it, and it's protected by ISA. The "Do not place a DC in
> a DMZ" rule is more for a singlehomed DC that's sitting in a DMZ and
> connecting to another DC inside the internal network.
>
> > I have read some people that have the PIX handle DHCP. Is that a better
> > idea
> > than having SBS handle DHCP? I plan on having the PIX do VPN, anyone got
> > suggestions/comments about this?
>
> It depends. If you're going to be going with ISA as well, then having the
> PIX hand out DHCP addresses won't matter, since the SBS server will be doing
> that for it's own private network behind itself. If you stick with a
> singlehomed (and no ISA) SBS server, then it's up to you. Most people
> prefer to let the SBS server handle it, as it's preconfigured. If you're
> handy with the PIX, then it's just as easy to configure the PIX to do it,
> and just hand out the SBS server for DNS and WINS to the clients.
>
> > One final question, this network is small, there are about 30
> > workstations.
> > It has been setup using the class A private address space. I had a friend
> > tell me that it should've been setup using the class C private address
> > space.
> > Can anyone confirm or deny this for me, and explain why?
>
> I'd say it doesn't matter. Yes, a class C space would be more efficient,
> but since it's private, it doesn't overly matter. I've got SBS servers
> using both class C and Class A spaces, and there's no real difference. Just
> remember if you're setting up VPNs between networks that (most of the time),
> the networks have to have different network ranges.
>
> > Any questions or comments about this or any other portion of this post
> > would
> > be great. Thanks all!
>
> Let ME know if I made any sense :)
>
> Matt Gibson - GSEC
>
>
>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Network Topology
- From: David G.
- Re: Network Topology
- From: Matt Gibson
- Re: Network Topology
- References:
- Network Topology
- From: David G.
- Re: Network Topology
- From: Matt Gibson
- Network Topology
- Prev by Date: RE: Fax Dialing
- Next by Date: Active Directory Recovery
- Previous by thread: Re: Network Topology
- Next by thread: Re: Network Topology
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|