<?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>Securism Blog &#187; p2p</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.securism.com/tag/p2p/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.securism.com</link>
	<description>Simple Security.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 18:17:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The case (for/against) filtering subscriber to subscriber network traffic</title>
		<link>http://blog.securism.com/2008/12/the-case-foragainst-filtering-subscriber-to-subscriber-network-traffic/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.securism.com/2008/12/the-case-foragainst-filtering-subscriber-to-subscriber-network-traffic/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2008 16:55:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walter Goulet</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Network Design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[filtering]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[p2p]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.securism.com/?p=43</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Part of my job is to help customers decide when and where it&#8217;s appropriate to deploy firewalls and other security devices in their networks. One point that has come up in discussion with my colleagues has been whether or not it is a good design principle to filter peer to peer traffic in service provider [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Part of my job is to help customers decide when and where it&#8217;s appropriate to deploy firewalls and other security devices in their networks. One point that has come up in discussion with my colleagues has been whether or not it is a good design principle to filter peer to peer traffic in service provider networks. Let me first clarify what I mean by service provider networks. I am referring to networks that are specifically designed to provide connectivity for subscribers, either to the Internet, to private intranets, or to each other. The owner of this network (the service provider) is essentially providing &#8216;pipes&#8217; for his customers. Service providers earn money by creating and meeting service level agreements (SLA) with subscribers that guarantee bandwidth and availability to customers.</p>
<p>I define subscriber to subscriber traffic filtering as a network design which explicitly prohibits the exchange of packets directly between subscribers without first passing those packets through a firewall or access control lists. An example of this type of network is a typical cable or DSL service network provider where subscriber packets are filtered through a network access server (NAS) prior to being forwarded to their destinations. A metro Ethernet network is an example of a network that does NOT perform peer to peer traffic filtering (metro Ethernet provides layer 2 connectivity between subscribers).</p>
<p>From a pure service provider business perspective, you care little about the types of traffic that subscribers exchange as long as you are able to meet the SLAs that you have established. If the traffic that is exchanged happens to contain malicious information (viruses, malware etc.), the service provider isn&#8217;t really going to care as the type of traffic exchanged doesn&#8217;t affect their ability to provide service to subscribers.</p>
<p>From a subscriber perspective, you care a lot about whether or not your home/business network is subjected to malicious traffic originating from your outside network connection. However, you also care about having the freedom to use your outside network connection as a raw pipe and being able to exchange any kind of network traffic with anybody that you can connect to (especially home users who use BitTorrent and other P2P protocols).</p>
<p>From a regulatory perspective, as a service provider you care about meeting the legal requirements to provide service in the regions you operate in order to avoid penalties etc. Certain governments impose restrictions on the types of traffic that network users are allowed to exchange (China being a prime example with strict requirements on which websites can be viewed by Chinese residents).</p>
<p>As can be seen from these 3 different perspectives, the need to implement filtering controls to restrict subscriber to subscriber traffic is not immediately evident. From a security threat perspective, most service provider networks are designed to provide clean seperation of bearer data (subscriber traffic) and control/management data used by the provider to run their network. So the risk of subscribers actually accessing the service provider&#8217;s infrastructure is quite low. A slightly more obvious security threat is the risk of being non-compliant to regulatory requirements. In this case, the risk of non-compliance can be quite high depending on each country&#8217;s regulations.</p>
<p>In conclusion, when considering whether or not to implement peer to peer traffic filtering and whether or not the lack of this filtering is a security risk, consider the network design and the regulatory requirements governing the network operation. You may be surprised to find that there is in fact little to no security risks to the service provider by NOT performing peer to peer traffic filtering.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.securism.com/2008/12/the-case-foragainst-filtering-subscriber-to-subscriber-network-traffic/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
