ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    How to Layer Your Security Needs

    IT Discussion
    8
    85
    5.7k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • jmooreJ
      jmoore
      last edited by

      From reading here there are many opinions on how to do certain activities in IT. This topic will be about security and the different ways you protect your network. Physical security should also be a part of that so if anyone has recommendations then please chime in. Lets learn from each other. Everyone has had good points so there is certainly something to be learned from having a discussion about it. feel free to respond to all or certain points here.

      We have the obligatory firewall and I put AV on every device that comes into the shop from Dell/HP. I setup the machines so I always have a local admin account I can always use if I need to. That is in my image from SmartDeploy and it evolves as I need it to. I record all machine info into OneNote that is organized by building along with the user and mac address if I know that info at the start. I constantly patch and update applications, Windows OS, and AV from this master list. I am a fanatic about updating. I use a combination of PDQ, Psexec, and Chocolatey to this for me. We have all server rooms and network closets locked. We also use security cameras for all of the buildings. That is a little of my environment.

      Everyone uses firewalls but are there certain features you can't live without?
      Any firewall features that used to be important but are no longer?
      Is it helpful to learn how to host our own DNS( thinking Bind) instead of using something like OpenDns?
      What kind of physical security do you employ?
      Are there certain types of layering that do not work well together?
      Any brands of firewalls or AV to avoid?
      Lastly, how do you layer your security if its different than usual?

      scottalanmillerS 5 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 3
      • scottalanmillerS
        scottalanmiller @jmoore
        last edited by

        @jmoore said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

        Any firewall features that used to be important but are no longer?

        Firewalls don't really have features, per se. I mean stateful detection, but that is about it, and that's just part of NAT routing. You can't skip that and have NAT still work. Firewalls have always been the same since day one - routing with permissions. Basically there was almost never a time that routers didn't do firewall functions.

        So no, I don't see anything as having changed.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • scottalanmillerS
          scottalanmiller @jmoore
          last edited by

          @jmoore said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

          Is it helpful to learn how to host our own DNS( thinking Bind) instead of using something like OpenDns?

          That's not usually an either/or scenario. If you are a tiny shop, having no DNS is fine and normal. But once you hit any size, you typically want something for DNS.

          OpenDNS or Strongarm.io are a different kind of thing, they are DNS-based security mechanisms for your external access. BIND is for your internal DNS.

          jmooreJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
          • scottalanmillerS
            scottalanmiller @jmoore
            last edited by

            @jmoore said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

            Any brands of firewalls or AV to avoid?

            Loads and loads. It's more the other way around, which make sense to consider.

            For firewalls, first you can't lump firewalls and UTM together. Different animals from different vendors.

            jmooreJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • scottalanmillerS
              scottalanmiller
              last edited by

              Firewalls to avoid....

              My rule here is that there are just a few vendors that you actually want to consider, and on the SMB end of things, there is little reason to ever consider anything but Ubiquiti.

              Once you get larger than Ubiquiti can handle, then you can look at Juniper, Cisco, and a few others. But you are talking $15K+ routers here or special HA functionality, which might be cheaper routers, but will be $10K+ in total.

              KellyK 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
              • scottalanmillerS
                scottalanmiller
                last edited by

                UTMs to avoid...

                My feeling here is that the only real UTM worth considering is Palo Alto. Deploying anything less just doesn't make sense. UTMs are full of problems and their value comes from being insanely comprehensive, which is what PA does. Other UTM products that are cheaper tend to be from unreliable vendors and of questionable value.

                dafyreD jmooreJ 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • scottalanmillerS
                  scottalanmiller @jmoore
                  last edited by

                  AV....

                  There are several decent AV vendors, and tons of terrible ones. In most cases, I would just stick with Windows Defender. If you are going to get into the Windows ecosystem and don't trust Windows security, you need to rethink what you are doing.

                  Understandably getting a central console for AV can be important, so products like Webroot can be great. They are one of the few AV companies that haven't done something to make me really question their integrity or quality.

                  DashrenderD jmooreJ 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • scottalanmillerS
                    scottalanmiller @jmoore
                    last edited by

                    @jmoore said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                    Lastly, how do you layer your security if its different than usual?

                    I'm totally focused on LANless design. Nothing on my network should be protected by something at the network level. Not that network protection should not exist, but it should never matter. Most attacks come from the LAN, not the WAN, and if your protection sits at the WAN barrier, most attacks will have already bypassed it.

                    Every device that we have, we treat as if it is going to sit directly on the Internet. Nothing is exposed, nothing trusts the LAN. There are exceptions for non-LAN networks like a pure play SAN or cluster interconnects.

                    jmooreJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • dafyreD
                      dafyre @scottalanmiller
                      last edited by

                      @scottalanmiller said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                      UTMs to avoid...

                      My feeling here is that the only real UTM worth considering is Palo Alto. Deploying anything less just doesn't make sense. UTMs are full of problems and their value comes from being insanely comprehensive, which is what PA does. Other UTM products that are cheaper tend to be from unreliable vendors and of questionable value.

                      Speaking from experience here, I will agree with this statement. I've run some UTM setups that came Prepckaged (Fortinet, Smoothwall, Untangle), and I have built some around Suricata (or Snort), Squid, DansGuardian, ClamAV and Shorewall.

                      These things are not easy to build right and do well. They all did Firewalling and routing right, but something screwy with other things like Traffic shaping or application filtering. Even tweaking them for your environment can be more of a pain than it's worth.

                      jmooreJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                      • DashrenderD
                        Dashrender @scottalanmiller
                        last edited by

                        @scottalanmiller said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                        AV....

                        There are several decent AV vendors, and tons of terrible ones. In most cases, I would just stick with Windows Defender. If you are going to get into the Windows ecosystem and don't trust Windows security, you need to rethink what you are doing.

                        Understandably getting a central console for AV can be important, so products like Webroot can be great. They are one of the few AV companies that haven't done something to make me really question their integrity or quality.

                        If you need centralized reporting on Windows Defender, you can purchase Intune.

                        scottalanmillerS jmooreJ 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
                        • scottalanmillerS
                          scottalanmiller @Dashrender
                          last edited by

                          @dashrender said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                          @scottalanmiller said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                          AV....

                          There are several decent AV vendors, and tons of terrible ones. In most cases, I would just stick with Windows Defender. If you are going to get into the Windows ecosystem and don't trust Windows security, you need to rethink what you are doing.

                          Understandably getting a central console for AV can be important, so products like Webroot can be great. They are one of the few AV companies that haven't done something to make me really question their integrity or quality.

                          If you need centralized reporting on Windows Defender, you can purchase Intune.

                          I assume that you can do it with some scripting, too. Not seen that done, but seems like it would likely be pretty doable.

                          DashrenderD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                          • DashrenderD
                            Dashrender @scottalanmiller
                            last edited by

                            @scottalanmiller said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                            @dashrender said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                            @scottalanmiller said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                            AV....

                            There are several decent AV vendors, and tons of terrible ones. In most cases, I would just stick with Windows Defender. If you are going to get into the Windows ecosystem and don't trust Windows security, you need to rethink what you are doing.

                            Understandably getting a central console for AV can be important, so products like Webroot can be great. They are one of the few AV companies that haven't done something to make me really question their integrity or quality.

                            If you need centralized reporting on Windows Defender, you can purchase Intune.

                            I assume that you can do it with some scripting, too. Not seen that done, but seems like it would likely be pretty doable.

                            Likely you could pull this type of data using something like Salt, then make your own reports.

                            scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                            • scottalanmillerS
                              scottalanmiller @Dashrender
                              last edited by

                              @dashrender said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                              @scottalanmiller said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                              @dashrender said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                              @scottalanmiller said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                              AV....

                              There are several decent AV vendors, and tons of terrible ones. In most cases, I would just stick with Windows Defender. If you are going to get into the Windows ecosystem and don't trust Windows security, you need to rethink what you are doing.

                              Understandably getting a central console for AV can be important, so products like Webroot can be great. They are one of the few AV companies that haven't done something to make me really question their integrity or quality.

                              If you need centralized reporting on Windows Defender, you can purchase Intune.

                              I assume that you can do it with some scripting, too. Not seen that done, but seems like it would likely be pretty doable.

                              Likely you could pull this type of data using something like Salt, then make your own reports.

                              Right, seems like a good way to go, assuming that there are necessary hooks for those sorts of things.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • jmooreJ
                                jmoore @scottalanmiller
                                last edited by

                                @scottalanmiller said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                                @jmoore said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                                Is it helpful to learn how to host our own DNS( thinking Bind) instead of using something like OpenDns?

                                That's not usually an either/or scenario. If you are a tiny shop, having no DNS is fine and normal. But once you hit any size, you typically want something for DNS.

                                OpenDNS or Strongarm.io are a different kind of thing, they are DNS-based security mechanisms for your external access. BIND is for your internal DNS.

                                Oh got it, I see I was using those terms wrong.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • jmooreJ
                                  jmoore @scottalanmiller
                                  last edited by

                                  @scottalanmiller said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                                  @jmoore said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                                  Any brands of firewalls or AV to avoid?

                                  Loads and loads. It's more the other way around, which make sense to consider.

                                  For firewalls, first you can't lump firewalls and UTM together. Different animals from different vendors.

                                  I thought UTM's were firewalls with a lot more features. Kind of like, a do everything security box?

                                  scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • scottalanmillerS
                                    scottalanmiller @jmoore
                                    last edited by

                                    @jmoore said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                                    @scottalanmiller said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                                    @jmoore said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                                    Any brands of firewalls or AV to avoid?

                                    Loads and loads. It's more the other way around, which make sense to consider.

                                    For firewalls, first you can't lump firewalls and UTM together. Different animals from different vendors.

                                    I thought UTM's were firewalls with a lot more features. Kind of like, a do everything security box?

                                    They are, sort of. UTM means "firewall plus loads of applications." It's a silly thing. The firewall is still the firewall, the UTM functionality is apps running on top of the firewall's processor.

                                    jmooreJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • scottalanmillerS
                                      scottalanmiller
                                      last edited by

                                      UTM itself is actually the antithesis of security in layers, as the entire point of a UTM is collapsing layers of security down!

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                      • jmooreJ
                                        jmoore @scottalanmiller
                                        last edited by

                                        @scottalanmiller said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                                        UTMs to avoid...

                                        My feeling here is that the only real UTM worth considering is Palo Alto. Deploying anything less just doesn't make sense. UTMs are full of problems and their value comes from being insanely comprehensive, which is what PA does. Other UTM products that are cheaper tend to be from unreliable vendors and of questionable value.

                                        I knew Palo Alto made good stuff but did not know they did not have hardly any competition. Good info

                                        scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • scottalanmillerS
                                          scottalanmiller @jmoore
                                          last edited by

                                          @jmoore said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                                          @scottalanmiller said in How to Layer Your Security Needs:

                                          UTMs to avoid...

                                          My feeling here is that the only real UTM worth considering is Palo Alto. Deploying anything less just doesn't make sense. UTMs are full of problems and their value comes from being insanely comprehensive, which is what PA does. Other UTM products that are cheaper tend to be from unreliable vendors and of questionable value.

                                          I knew Palo Alto made good stuff but did not know they did not have hardly any competition. Good info

                                          There is a little, but very little. That will change with time, but as the entire concept of a UTM is, I feel, fundamentally flawed, I doubt that many serious competitors will step into the space.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                          • scottalanmillerS
                                            scottalanmiller
                                            last edited by

                                            That said, PA does make the best non-UTM network protection, too. That's where I foresee them getting competition eventually.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 3
                                            • 4
                                            • 5
                                            • 1 / 5
                                            • First post
                                              Last post