[Info-vax] What to do with my VAX.....

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 10/18/2020 1:34 PM, Grant Taylor wrote:
> On 10/18/20 3:17 AM, seasoned_geek wrote:
>> There is a growing need for an OS without any TCP/IP stack. *nix did 
>> it wrong. There is absolutely no way of securing any system using *nix 
>> based TCP/IP when it is connected to the Internet. 
> 
> I can't agree with that.
> 
> Sure, putting a system on the Internet exposes it to more harm than 
> sitting in a room by itself with no external connectivity.  But then 
> again, powering the system on exposes it to more harm than completely 
> disconnecting it from power.
> 
> Also, anything with a TCP/IP stack can potentially be attacked across 
> the Internet, not just *nix.

Yep.

And in fact most servers on the internet are running *nix (assuming
Linux is included in "*nix").

>> Lots of places dusting off old proprietary protocols for internal 
>> networks, putting one or two sacrificial machines out on the Internet 
>> and only installing/allowing the proprietary protocol between them and 
>> the internal network.
> 
> I don't agree that using a different protocol makes the systems 
> inherently more secure.

Yep.

The TCP/IP protocols are probably some of the more secure just
because they have been examined and tested in depth.

> Judicious firewalling can offer the same level of protection for the 
> other systems without the complexity of the other protocol(s).
> 
> What the other protocols do offer is making the other systems 
> incompatible with the Internet, thus meaning that they can't 
> /accidentally/ or /inadvertently/ communicate with the Internet if 
> (when) the firewall becomes misconfigured.  This is a belt and 
> suspenders redundant security configuration.

Such a misconfiguration is not likely to happen.

If the firewall does nothing then nothing will get through since the
internal IP addresses will not be accessible.

Rules get added to forward a specific port to a specific IP address
and port.

There should not be any way to add wildcard forwarding.

There can be benefits from:

--(protocol A)--intermediate box--(protocol B)--real box

since it is more difficult to exploit protocol problems to
hit the real box.

> If anything, having additional protocols means additional lines of code 
> which is tantamount to additional attack surface.

Non-TCP/IP is usually a total non-starter.

Today very few places run only their own stuff on top of the OS. They
use lots of third party software.

And that third party software typical expect TCP/IP today.

Arne