Posts: 2228
Joined: 12.Apr.2004
From: Taylorville, IL
Status: offline
That's becuase you boys don't know your layer 7 DMZ's from your elbows
Oh,...now,...Jason....
"Don't be silly".... what do you mean? We are learning here.....
By the time you allow what you need for the thing to be a Domain Member from the DMZ,...you hardly have any DMZ left,...you've just already allowed all the important stuff that the DMZ is trying to prevent in the first place.
Posts: 4663
Joined: 30.Jul.2002
From: United Kingdom
Status: offline
Sorry, you know I like a bit of fun
Depends on your definition of DMZ; hence why perimeter network is a better name. To me, you have trusted and untrusted perimeter networks as they just represent different security zones for different services.
Domain members in a 'trusted perimeter' network is fine by me, assuming you protect this network with something that understands the application protocols involved and add host protection too...being able to pre-auth connections and use web publishing with ISA is a good example of when a perimeter network becomes "more trusted"...YMMV and probably does
In a pivot attack, if the attacker gets remote code execution on that server at an "adequate level", for example, it can easily ARP mitm your "domain traffic"(whatever "domain" means) without the perimeter in place, unless your switches are smart enough and configured appropriatelly or some other anti-ARP mitm measures are in place. With the perimeter in place, it may need to use a double pivot attack to get where it wants to, and even so it may not get where it wants. As Jason said, YMMV...
we have a 2 DMZ. one is for server that in workgroup such as web server and another DMZ is for server that in a domain member such as Frontend exchange.
for me, I also feel like my web server in workgroup is less secure.
do I have to move to DMZ which is in a domain member.
_____________________________
Aliyani Sabrey
MCSE+Security, MCSA+Security, ISA Server 2004 & 2006
Posts: 4663
Joined: 30.Jul.2002
From: United Kingdom
Status: offline
No, a model using two different types of DMZs is good IMHO. Not all DMZ members need to be domain members; with both types of DMZs you then have a choice of which to use...