On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 10:05 PM, Roland Dobbins <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Oct 9, 2009, at 11:39 AM, zafar ullah wrote: > > What you guys suggest, which is best approach for robust & scalable secure >> network? >> > > Firewalls have no place in front of servers at all. They add no security > value at all, and make the servers behind them vastly more vulnerable to > DDoS, as well as greatly increasing the attack surface if so-called > 'protocol inspectors' are enabled. > That is unless you're talking about an Arbor Peakflow SP Threat Managment System, right? I hear its "a fully integrated component [... which] conducts surgical mitigation of network and service-layer attacks that threaten your Internet Data Center." This glossy website in front of me also says that for Web 2.0 apps, the Peakflow device fully protects a server's Web services by stopping malformed HTTP packets and rate-limiting HTTP requests. And its abilities to protect VoIP and DNS servers, as well as generic TCP normalization techniques are well-advertised. Are you saying that Arbor networks is misguided about their server protection devices, Roland? (add an appropriate grain of salt or two...) -Nick _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
