2003 Server with an interface on the internet

In a couple places I have run across Windows Servers sitting directly on the internet with routable IPs on 1 interface and internal Ips on another.   The person that has done this says that it is perfectly fine and safe.  I have a hard time beleiving that to be true, what would be the point of firewalls if that was the case.

So my question is, is that really a good idea and if not why?
InvisibleTerrorAsked:
Who is Participating?
 
CharliePete00Connect With a Mentor Commented:
A Windows server is a general purpose machine.  By default it posses all of the necessary instructions to provide a wide range of services (file, print, dns, web, aplication, routing, etc.) and is designed to execute applications.  They also designed to be dynamic and may be configured to act in just about any role.  A dedicated firewall, on the other hand, is designed for a specifc purpose, limiting and controlling network traffic, and only contains the necessary instructions for the tasks it was designed for.  If security is compromised on a firewall it's difficult to get it to act like anything but a firewall.  If security is compromised on a Windows server you can make it act like just about anything.  While you may be able to secure a Windows server to the point it can be deemed "safe" to expose to the Internet the consequences of any compromises of its security can be pretty severe.  It's always good practice to place a standoff device like a firewall between your servers and the outside world.
0
 
gidds99Commented:
Firewalls provide additional security and can provide valuable defence where a Windows Server is not adequately secured (or as an additional layer of network security for Internet facing Windows Servers).
0
NEW Internet Security Report Now Available!

WatchGuard’s Threat Lab is a group of dedicated threat researchers committed to helping you stay ahead of the bad guys by providing in-depth analysis of the top security threats to your network.  Check out this quarters report on the threats that shook the industry in Q4 2017.

 
mikeleebrlaCommented:
if by 'directly' you mean there is no router/firewall between the internet and the server, then you are correct that the setup isn't secure at all.  nothing you do on the server to 'protect' it really does much good since the 'offender' has already hit the server.  that is what the firewall/router needs to prevent.

0
 
InvisibleTerrorAuthor Commented:
Yes that is exactly what I mean.
0
 
Dean ChafeeIT/InfoSec ManagerCommented:
Agreeing with mikeleebrla ... if indeed the second interface is a direct connect to a router without ACLs and/or firewall in place, this is just as bad a the primary NIC connected to a router with a public IP.  Does the gateway IP route to the "unsecure" NIC? One would assume so or else it would be useless for internet traffic.  Go here and run SheildsUP from the server to check open ports, etc, then show the person:
www.grc.com
FS-
0
 
RevelationCSCommented:
what you describe above sounds like a proxy/load balancing type environment. If properly secured with firewalls and intrusion detection (internal and external for both), then it is safe to use that method. Using a proxy method to hide your internal network schema is typically a recommended practice as it makes it harder for an external hacker to gain access to the servers as they need to compromise both the external proxy (the hardware with the external IP address) along with the internal machine. Firewalls place more of a difficulty level on that as they would also have to compromise the firewalls.
0
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.