Advice from you?

This weekend I will be implementing this on our small office network (strictly our testing dept) I will be setting up a Watchguard FB1000 as my first line of defense. After the configuration of the firewall I was going to have a Linux Mandrake box acting as a server type firewall. All information would pass through this box.

Now my questions are simply this:

1. Is Mandrake a secure enough system or should I look into other programs (I don't use Linux this will be my first "real" use of the system)?

2. Will the cable connection be slowed down to much?

Client machines will be running Win2000 with their personal sygate firewalls (or is that overkill?).

So, what do you all think about the setup, is it practical?

I know the Linux box will take some time to configure but I got a lot of reading to do so I am hope I can weed through it.


- Adiz

Sounds pretty good to me. All the major linux distros are known for being pretty secure, from what I've gathered.

The linux distros are not more secure than the Windows os, many vulnerabilities are found in both, however it is a better choice in this case if you are able to properly secure it.

I'd say go with what you feel comfortable with..if you want to set up mandrake,go right ahead..if you want Windows 2000 do that..security's only as good as you can make it
Now,your cable connection..I'd assume some slowing down in speed..nothing much though
Lastly..if you're going to be using Sygate on your Windows2000 computers,you might want to shut down the Windows firewall..have fun:D

If you want to harder your Linux, take a look at this:
http://www.bastille-linux.org/
It is not hard to do and give you a lot of security (and knowledge about linux security too)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by adiz
1. Is Mandrake a secure enough system or should I look into other programs (I don't use Linux this will be my first "real" use of the system)?

---

If this is your first "real" use of linux, put off using it until you are comfortable with it and can properly install a bare minimal install, upgrade the kernel, and know how to work the logging facilities. An ideal firewall should basically have a shell, a kernel, a text editor, and the necessary libraries to run those things. Updating the kernel will be necessary should vulnerabilities be found that could be remotely exploited. Knowing how to work the logging facilities is pretty much a requirement for running any kind of linux box. Once you are comfortable with these things, you could then be able to administer it.

What do you mean by "server type firewall"?

I agree, linux is deep water and you definately want to step into the shallow end first. You definately don't want to use it in an official capacity until you're well familiarized with it.

Well I agree and I know it is probably not smart to go into something that is new. But I feel that, that is the only way I learn is by just doing it. I mean everything I have done on the computer is just sorta learning as I go and it seems to work fine. That is why I am going to be testing this system for a month or so. I am also going to sign a release and have a few buddies of mine try to break and in and show me the vulnerabilities so that I can learn about it.

But I am still debating because I can also go with Win 2000 or 2003 server both of which I know good. But I just have this strange facination with Linux and I don't wanna miss using it and I sorta feel like it is now or never.

- Adiz

Well then you're on the right track!

adiz

There are many great threads in AO about hardening your linux, here's a few:

http://www.antionline.com/showthread...ardening+linux

http://www.antionline.com/showthread...ardening+linux

http://www.antionline.com/showthread...ardening+linux


For more just enter: 'hardening linux" into the search engine on the main page. Good luck

cheers

If you want it to be more of a firewall and less of a server, I would HIGHLY recomend IPCOP. It's basically and stripped down version of linux running snort. www.ipcop.org

Quote:

---

But I am still debating because I can also go with Win 2000 or 2003 server

---

Whichever one you own legally. If you own both legally, windows 2003 server is much more resource intensive than 2000, so you need to decide what that computer can handle. While 2000 is much more lightweight, it is also not as easily configurable in terms of security, and the kernel of windows 2003 is already hardcoded to give priority to server processes and forking.

As for Linux in the workplace, I say put that on hold for now. Nothing can be worse than telling your Boss you want to use linux, him letting you do it, and then something go wrong due to newness of the OS and he hates it forever. So, I say get a feel for linux as a server at your own home first, and not mandrake as it's very core is meant more towards desktops. Think about slackware, openBSD, debian, or even Fedora Core 1 (NOT 2) when leaning towards the server side of Linux. Sure, in the end after configuration any OS can do the exact same things, but it's a matter of ease of use, ease of configurability, and which one you feel most comfortable with. If you think Mandrake can handle everything you need, go for it.

Linux is not deep water... ;)



The real key is to RTFM. Check your logs, keep it patched, and you should be fine. Read up on securing Linux in the threads shown above.

excuse me a minute here but, with all the firewals that he whats to use would this not cause some problems with the lan? sorry if I am asking a bad question. I mean that is alot of firewalls behind his connection. Are you worried that the first too are not enough or that someone on a differnt machine will attack one of the others? Just a question .

Actually Axeman,he'll be keeping just one firewall..we're just suggesting which ones he could try,and no,why would it have an effect on his LAN?

just checking, though I was reading that wrong. sorry about that