<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Packetslave Industries &#187; CCIE Security</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.packetslave.com/category/ccie-security/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.packetslave.com</link>
	<description>This is my blog.  There are many like it, but this one is mine.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 19:04:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>IOS 12.4T: Management-Plane Protection</title>
		<link>http://www.packetslave.com/2010/07/06/ios-12-4t-management-plane-protection/</link>
		<comments>http://www.packetslave.com/2010/07/06/ios-12-4t-management-plane-protection/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 17:39:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>blanders</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CCIE Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cisco]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.packetslave.com/?p=216</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[While working through a CCIE Security practice lab, I came across a task that read (in essence): &#8220;Only allow SSH and SNMP access to the router through interface Gig0/1.  Do not use an interface or VTY ACL to accomplish this.&#8221;   A search through the IOS configuration guides and command references was unhelpful, including the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While working through a CCIE Security practice lab, I came across a task that read (in essence): &#8220;Only allow SSH and SNMP access to the router through interface Gig0/1.  Do not use an interface or VTY ACL to accomplish this.&#8221;   A search through the IOS configuration guides and command references was unhelpful, including the last-resort tactic of &#8220;go to the Master Index and use Ctrl-F to search for likely keywords.&#8221;  Finally, I resorted to asking on GroupStudy.  Within minutes, the answer came back:  <strong>use management-plane protection</strong>.  What on earth is that?  To quote Cisco:</p>
<blockquote><p>The Management Plane Protection (MPP) feature in Cisco IOS software provides the capability to restrict the interfaces on which network management packets are allowed to enter a device. The MPP feature allows a network operator to designate one or more router interfaces as management interfaces. Device management traffic is permitted to enter a device only through these management interfaces. After MPP is enabled, no interfaces except designated management interfaces will accept network management traffic destined to the device.</p>
<p>http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_4t/12_4t11/htsecmpp.html</p></blockquote>
<p>This feature was added in 12.4(6)T but <strong>only</strong> seems to be documented under Feature Guides, <strong>not</strong> in the main IOS command reference or configuration guides.  Gee, thanks Cisco!</p>
<p>A configuration example (based on the practice lab task above):</p>
<pre style="padding-left: 30px;">control-plane host
  management-interface GigabitEthernet0/1 allow ssh snmp
end</pre>
<p>When this configuration is applied to the router (assuming SSH has been previously configured), remote SSH and SNMP connections to the router will <strong>only</strong> be accepted when entering through Gi0/1.  This is based on the <strong>interface</strong>, not on the IP address.  SSH and SNMP connections to Gi0/1&#8242;s IP address entering through other interfaces will fail.  In addition, other management traffic (telnet, etc.) entering through Gi0/1 will also fail.  The complete list of what IOS considers management traffic is:</p>
<ul>
<li>SSH v1 and v2</li>
<li>telnet</li>
<li>HTTP / HTTPS</li>
<li>FTP</li>
<li>SNMP (all version)</li>
<li>TFTP</li>
<li>BEEP (Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol)</li>
</ul>
<p>Note that other traffic destined for the router (such as routing protocols and ARP) are not affected, nor is traffic routed through the management interface.  This is different from the management-interface functionality on an ASA, where the designated port can only be used for management traffic.</p>
<p>In summary, it is quite annoying that Cisco doesn&#8217;t seem to have actually documented this feature properly, since it has the potential to be a very useful tool in the network administrator&#8217;s toolbox.  Depending on the network design, enabling MPP makes it less likely that a management protocol becomes accessible on an interface connected to a hostile network, while simplifying interface ACLs needed to properly secure the device.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.packetslave.com/2010/07/06/ios-12-4t-management-plane-protection/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ASA URL filtering with MPF</title>
		<link>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/10/21/asa-url-filtering-with-mpf/</link>
		<comments>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/10/21/asa-url-filtering-with-mpf/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 17:36:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>blanders</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[ASA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CCIE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CCIE Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[filtering]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MPF]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.packetslave.com/?p=177</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Problem:  &#8220;I want to block facebook.com and myspace.com but I don&#8217;t have a Websense server.&#8221; regex domlist1 "facebook.com" regex domlist2 "myspace.com" ! class-map type regex match-any DomainBlockList match regex domlist1 match regex domlist2 ! class-map type inspect http match-all BlockDomainsClass match request header host regex class DomainBlockList ! policy-map type inspect http http_inspection_policy class BlockDomainsClass [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Problem:  &#8220;I want to block facebook.com and myspace.com but I don&#8217;t have a Websense server.&#8221;</p>
<pre>regex domlist1 "facebook.com"
regex domlist2 "myspace.com"
!
class-map type regex match-any DomainBlockList
  match regex domlist1
  match regex domlist2
!
class-map type inspect http match-all BlockDomainsClass
  match request header host regex class DomainBlockList
!
policy-map type inspect http http_inspection_policy
  class BlockDomainsClass
  reset log
!
policy-map global_policy
  class inspection_default
  inspect http http_inspection_policy
!
service-policy global_policy global
wr mem</pre>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/10/21/asa-url-filtering-with-mpf/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>BGP Through an ASA with Authentication</title>
		<link>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/07/12/bgp-through-an-asa-with-authentication/</link>
		<comments>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/07/12/bgp-through-an-asa-with-authentication/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Jul 2009 19:34:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>blanders</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[ASA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BGP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CCIE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CCIE Security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.packetslave.com/?p=173</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By default, the ASA will strip TCP option 19 causing MD5 authentication for BGP to fail.  In addition, the ASA randomizes the TCP sequence numbers, which also breaks things.  To fix this: tcp-map BGP_FIX tcp-options range 19 19 allow ! access-list BGP permit tcp any any eq 179 ! class BGP match access-list BGP !! [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By default, the ASA will strip TCP option 19 causing MD5 authentication for BGP to fail.  In addition, the ASA randomizes the TCP sequence numbers, which also breaks things.  To fix this:</p>
<pre>tcp-map BGP_FIX
  tcp-options range 19 19 allow
!
access-list BGP permit tcp any any eq 179
!
class BGP
  match access-list BGP
  !! could also use match protocol tcp eq bgp
!
policy-map global_policy
  class BGP
    set connection advanced-options BGP_FIX
    set connection random-sequence-number disable
!</pre>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/07/12/bgp-through-an-asa-with-authentication/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ASA Authentication Proxy with ACS</title>
		<link>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/07/12/asa-authentication-proxy-with-acs/</link>
		<comments>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/07/12/asa-authentication-proxy-with-acs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Jul 2009 16:45:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>blanders</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[AAA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ASA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CCIE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CCIE Security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.packetslave.com/?p=171</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Goal:  all outbound telnet and HTTP connections passing through the ASA must first be authenticated against an ACS server using the TACACS+ protocol. aaa-server ACS_SERVER protocol tacacs+ aaa-server ACS_SERVER (inside) host 1.2.3.4 key myACSkey ! access-list outbound_auth permit tcp any any eq 23 access-list outbound_auth permit tcp any any eq 80 ! aaa authentication match [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Goal:  all outbound telnet and HTTP connections passing through the ASA must first be authenticated against an ACS server using the TACACS+ protocol.</p>
<pre>aaa-server ACS_SERVER protocol tacacs+
aaa-server ACS_SERVER (inside) host 1.2.3.4
    key myACSkey
!
access-list outbound_auth permit tcp any any eq 23
access-list outbound_auth permit tcp any any eq 80
!
aaa authentication match outbound_auth inside ACS_SERVER</pre>
<p>There are additional options to configure HTTP vs. HTTPS and redirection vs. basic HTTP authentication.  The documentation is a bit confusing, so I will be labbing this up shortly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/07/12/asa-authentication-proxy-with-acs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ASA Enhanced Service Object Groups</title>
		<link>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/07/11/asa-enhanced-service-object-groups/</link>
		<comments>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/07/11/asa-enhanced-service-object-groups/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 22:02:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>blanders</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[ASA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CCIE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CCIE Security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.packetslave.com/?p=168</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The ASA introduced the concept of object groups in version 7.0.  You could group a list of IP addresses, protocols, services, or ICMP types into one logical entity and refer to it by name in your access lists.  In the 7.x releases, however, a service object group could only contain entries for a single protocol [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The ASA introduced the concept of <a title="ASA 7.0 Configuration Guide" href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/security/asa/asa70/configuration/guide/traffic.html#wp1053224">object groups</a> in version 7.0.  You could group a list of IP addresses, protocols, services, or ICMP types into one logical entity and refer to it by name in your access lists.  In the 7.x releases, however, a service object group could only contain entries for a single protocol (TCP, UDP, or both TCP/UDP).  This forced admins to either use a separate object group for TCP and UDP ports (requiring two ACE entries), or to match more ports than necessary (by using the tcp-udp type).</p>
<p>The 8.0 release of the ASA software solves this problem by introducing an enhanced Service object group that allows a mix of multiple protocols within the same group.  Unfortunately, the 8.0 and 8.2 ASA configuration guides don&#8217;t appear to cover this new type of service group or show an example.</p>
<pre>object-group network DMZ_NET
  network-object 1.2.3.0 255.255.255.0
!
object-group service DMZ_SERVICES
  service-object tcp eq 80
  service-object udp eq 53
  service-object tcp eq 53
  service-object icmp
!
access-list DMZ extended permit object-group DMZ_SERVICES any object-group DMZ_NET</pre>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/07/11/asa-enhanced-service-object-groups/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Restarting CCIE Security</title>
		<link>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/07/06/restarting-ccie-security/</link>
		<comments>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/07/06/restarting-ccie-security/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 01:47:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>blanders</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CCIE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CCIE Security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.packetslave.com/?p=165</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Now that the major CCIE training vendors have released updates covering the new CCIE Security 3.0 blueprint topics, I&#8217;ve decided to restart my preparations for the exam. My current goal is to sit the lab exam on October 1 in RTP. I&#8217;ll be using a mix of both IPexpert and InternetworkExpert materials for my preparation.  [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now that the major CCIE training vendors have released updates covering the new CCIE Security 3.0 blueprint topics, I&#8217;ve decided to restart my preparations for the exam.  My current goal is to sit the lab exam on October 1 in RTP.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll be using a mix of both IPexpert and InternetworkExpert materials for my preparation.  Both vendors&#8217; new technology-focused lab releases look terrific.  Hopefully, by the time I work through them they&#8217;ll have some updated 8-hour full mock labs available.</p>
<p>For the most part, I&#8217;ll be relying on Dynamips for lab work, since now that the VPN 3000 is no longer in the lab everything except for the switches can be simulated.  I&#8217;ll have to rent some rack time to review the switch-based security stuff from R&amp;S, but for the most part I&#8217;m not worried there.</p>
<ul></ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/07/06/restarting-ccie-security/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Source Filtering for Internet Traffic</title>
		<link>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/01/24/source-filtering-for-internet-traffic/</link>
		<comments>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/01/24/source-filtering-for-internet-traffic/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 19:57:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>blanders</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CCIE Security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.packetslave.com/2009/01/24/source-filtering-for-internet-traffic/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When examining inbound traffic at your Internet edge, there are quite a few source networks that should be automatically discarded. RFC 3330 (Special-Use IPv4 Addresses) specifies many of these. Local Networks In most sane networks, you should never see inbound traffic from your own address space. Thus, if you have 12.3.45.0/24 as your public address [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When examining inbound traffic at your Internet edge, there are quite a few source networks that should be automatically discarded. RFC 3330 (Special-Use IPv4 Addresses) specifies many of these.</p>
<p><strong>Local Networks</strong></p>
<p>In most sane networks, you should never see inbound traffic from your own address space. Thus, if you have <span style="font-family: 'Courier New';">12.3.45.0/24</span> as your public address space, your inbound ACL should block traffic appearing to be sourced <em>from</em> this network.</p>
<p><strong>RFC 1918</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-family: 'Courier New';">10.0.0.0 /8<br />
172.16.0.0 /12<br />
192.168.0.0 /16</span></p>
<p>An easy way to remember the CIDR value for these (found on GroupStudy): each is 4 greater than the last.</p>
<p><strong>Local-only Networks</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-family: 'Courier New';">0.0.0.0 /8<br />
127.0.0.0 /8 &#8211; note: <em>not</em> just 127.0.0.1!<br />
169.254.0.0 /16<br /></span></p>
<p>These are (respectively) the &#8220;this network&#8221; range, the localhost address space, and the Microsoft AutoNet network (also called APIPA, for Automated Private IP Addressing).</p>
<p><strong>Reserved Networks</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-family: 'Courier New';">192.0.2.0 /24 &#8211; TEST-NET, e.g. example.com<br />
198.18.0.0 /15 &#8211; Benchmark networks<br />
240.0.0.0 /4 &#8211; Class E</span></p>
<p><strong>Multicast</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-family: 'Courier New';">224.0.0.0 /4</span></p>
<p>The multicast address space will never appear as a <em>source</em> address in legitimate traffic. A multicast IP is always a <em>destination.</em></p>
<p><strong>Unassigned Address Space</strong></p>
<p>Many experts recommend filtering all unallocated address space (networks that have not been assigned to users or ISPs by the various numbering authorities, such as ARIN or APNIC). This requires diligence on the part of network administrators to track new address allocations and keep ACLs up-to-date, to avoid blackholing legitimate traffic from newly-assigned networks. For more information, see the <a href="http://www.team-cymru.org/Services/Bogons/" title="Bogon Reference">Bogon Reference</a> at Cymru.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/01/24/source-filtering-for-internet-traffic/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Simple NAT (PAT) Example #1</title>
		<link>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/01/21/simple-nat-example-1/</link>
		<comments>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/01/21/simple-nat-example-1/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 00:25:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>blanders</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CCIE Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IOS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NAT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.packetslave.com/?p=156</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A very simple example for when you want to very quickly get a network (for example, a branch office) online behind a DSL line or similar.  This PATs all private network traffic behind the outside interface&#8217;s public IP. interface FastEthernet0/0 description TO_ISP ip nat outside ! interface FastEthernet0/1 description TO_LAN ip nat inside ! ip [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A very simple example for when you want to very quickly get a network (for example, a branch office) online behind a DSL line or similar.  This PATs all private network traffic behind the outside interface&#8217;s public IP.</p>
<pre>interface FastEthernet0/0
  description TO_ISP
  ip nat outside
!
interface FastEthernet0/1
  description TO_LAN
  ip nat inside
!
ip access-list standard NAT_SOURCE
  permit 10.1.1.0 0.0.0.255
!
ip nat inside source list NAT_SOURCE interface FastEthernet0/0 overload</pre>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.packetslave.com/2009/01/21/simple-nat-example-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
