Firewall is a network security system that monitors and controls incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predetermined security rules. A firewall typically establishes a barrier between a trusted network and an untrusted network, such as the Internet.
An Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) is a network security/threat prevention technology that examines network traffic flows to detect and prevent vulnerability exploits. Firewalls and intrusion prevention systems (IPSs). Both devices work to secure networks but with slightly different goals and approaches.
Traditionally , a firewall sits in the forwarding path of all packets so that the firewall can then choose which packets to discard and which to allow through By doing so, the firewall protects the network from different kinds of issues by allowing only the intended types of traffic to flow in and out of the network. In fact, in its most basic form, firewalls do the same kinds of work that routers do with ACLs, but firewalls can perform that packet-filtering function with many more options, as well as perform other security tasks.
The figure shows a firewall, like the Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) firewall, connected to a Cisco router, which in turn connects to the Internet. All enterprise traffic going to or from the Internet would be sent through the firewall. The firewall would consider its rules and make a choice for each packet, whether the packet should be allowed through.
Although firewalls have some router-like features (such as packet forwarding and packet filtering), they provide much more advanced security features than a traditional router. For example, most firewalls can use the following kinds of logic to make the choice of whether to discard or allow a packet:
- Like router IP ACLs, match the source and destination IP addresses
- Like router IP ACLs, identify applications by matching their static well-known TCP and UDP ports
- Watch application-layer flows to know what additional TCP and UDP ports are used by a particular flow, and filter based on those ports
- Match the text in the URI of an HTTP request—that is, look at and compare the contents of what is often called the web address—and match patterns to decide whether to allow or deny the download of the web page identified by that URI
- Keep state information by storing information about each packet, and make decisions about filtering future packets based on the historical state information (called statefull inspection, or being a statefull firewall).
The stateful firewall feature provides the means to prevent a variety of attacks and is one of the more obvious differences between the ACL processing of a router versus security filtering by a firewall. Routers must spend as little time as possible processing each packet so that the packets experience little delay passing through the router. The router cannot take the time to gather information about a packet, and then for future packets, consider some saved state information about earlier packets when making a filtering decision. Because they focus on network security, firewalls do save some information about packets and can consider that information for future filtering decisions.
As an example of the benefits of using a stateful firewall, consider a simple denial of service (DoS) attack. An attacker can make this type of attack against a web server by using tools that create (or start to create) a large volume of TCP connections to the server. The firewall might allow TCP connections to that server normally, but imagine that the server might typically receive 10 new TCP connections per second under normal conditions and 100 per second at the busiest times. A DoS attack might attempt thousands or more TCP connections per second, driving up CPU and RAM use on the server and eventually overloading the server to the point that it cannot serve legitimate users.
A statefull firewall could be tracking the number of TCP connections per second—that is, recording state information based on earlier packets—including the number of TCP connection requests from each client IP address to each server address. The statefull firewall could notice a large number of TCP connections, check its state information, and then notice that the number of requests is very large from a small number of clients to that particular server, which is typical of some kinds of DoS attacks. The statefull firewall could then start filtering those packets, helping the web server survive the attack, whereas a stateless firewall or a router ACL would not have had the historical state information to realize that a DoS attack was occurring.
Firewalls not only filter packets, they also pay close attention to which host initiates communications. That concept is most obvious with TCP as the transport layer protocol, where the client initiates the TCP connection by sending a TCP segment that sets the SYN bit only.Firewalls use logic considers which host initiated a TCP connection by watching these initial TCP segments. To see the importance of who initiates the connections, think about a typical enterprise network with a connection to the Internet. The company has users inside the company who open web browsers, initiating connections to web servers across the Internet. However, by having a working Internet connection, that same company opens up the possibility that an attacker might try to create a TCP connection to the company’s internal web servers used for payroll processing. Of course, the company does not want random Internet users or attackers to be able to connect to their payroll server.
Firewalls use the concept of security zones (also called a zone for short) when defining which hosts can initiate new connections. The firewall has rules, and those rules define which host can initiate connections from one zone to another zone. Also, by using zones, a firewall can place multiple interfaces into the same zone, in cases for which multiple interfaces should have the same security rules applied.
Note that with this one simple rule, the correct traffic is allowed while filtering the unwanted traffic by default. Firewalls typically disallow all traffic unless a rule specifically allows the packet. So, with this simple rule to allow inside users to initiate connections to the outside zone , and that alone, the firewall also prevents outside users from initiating connections to inside hosts. Most companies have an inside and outside zone, as well as a special zone called the demilitarized zone (DMZ). Although the DMZ name comes from the real world, it has been used in IT for decades to refer to a firewall security zone used to place servers that need to be available for use by users in the public Internet.
Intrusion Prevention Systems (IPS)
Traditionally, a firewall works with a set of user-configured rules about where packets should be allowed to flow in a network. The firewall needs to sit in the path of the packets so it can filter the packets, redirect them for collection and later analysis, or let them continue toward their destination. A traditional intrusion prevention system (IPS) can sit in the path packets take through the network, and it can filter packets, but it makes its decisions with different logic. The IPS first downloads a database of exploit signatures. Each signature defines different header field values found in sequences of packets used by different exploits. Then the IPS can examine packets, compare them to the known exploit signatures, and notice when packets may be part of a known exploit. Once identified, the IPS can log the event, discard packets, or even redirect the packets to another security application for further examination.
A traditional IPS differs from firewalls in that instead of an engineer at the company defining rules for that company based on applications (by port number) and zones, the IPS applies the logic based on signatures supplied mostly by the IPS vendor. Those signatures look for these kinds of attacks:
To accomplish its mission, the IPS needs to download and keep updating its signature database. Security experts work to create the signatures. The IPS must then download the exploit signature database and keep downloading updates over time.
Think about what happens when an entirely new computer virus has been created. Host-based security products, like antivirus software, should be installed on the computers inside the company. These tools use a similar model as the IPS, keeping an updated database of virus signatures. The signatures might look for patterns in how a computer virus could be stored inside files on the computer, or in files sent to the computer via email or web browsers. But there will be some time lag between the day when the virus has been discovered (called zero-day attacks) and when researchers have developed a virus signature, changed their database, and allowed time for all the hosts to update their antivirus software. The hosts are at risk during this time lag.
The IPS provides a complimentary service to prevent viruses. Researchers will look for ways an IPS could recognize the same virus while in flight through the network with new IPS signatures—for instance, looking for packets with a particular port and a particular hex string in the application payload. Once developed, the IPS devices in the network need to be updated with the new signature database, protecting against that virus. Both the host-based and IPS-based protections play an important role, but the fact that one IPS protects sections of a network means that the IPS can sometimes more quickly react to new threats to protect hosts.
Cisco Next-Generation Firewalls
Cisco and some of their competitors started using the term next generation when discussing their security products to emphasize some of the newer features. In short, a next-generation firewall (NGFW) and a next-generation IPS (NGIPS) are the now-current firewall and IPS products from Cisco.
However, the use of the term next generation goes far beyond just a marketing label: the term emphasizes some major shifts and improvements over the years. The security industry sees endless cycles of new attacks followed by new solutions, with some solutions requiring new product features or even new products. Some of the changes that have required new security features include the proliferation of mobile devices—devices that leave the enterprise, connect to the Internet, and return to the Enterprise—creating a whole new level of risk. Also, no single security function or appliance (firewall, IPS, antimalware) can hope to stop some threats, so the next-generation tools must be able to work better together to provide solutions. In short, the next-generation products have real useful features not found in their predecessor products.
As for Cisco products, for many years Cisco branded its firewalls as the Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA). Around 2013, Cisco acquired Sourcefire, a security product company. Many of the next-generation firewall (and IPS) features come from software acquired through that acquisition. As of 2020 , all of Cisco’s currently sold firewalls have names that evoke memories of the Sourcefire acquisition, with most of the firewall product line being called Cisco Firepower firewalls.
An NGFW still does the traditional functions of a firewall, of course, like stateful filtering by comparing fields in the IP, TCP, and UDP headers, and using security zones when defining firewall rules. To provide some insight into some of the newer next-generation features, consider the challenge of matching packets with ports:
1. Each IP-based application should use a well-known port.
2. Attackers know that firewalls will filter most well-known ports from sessions initiated from the outside zone to the inside zone.
3. Attackers use port scanning to find any port that a company’s firewall will allow through right now.
4. Attackers attempt to use a protocol of their choosing (for example, HTTP) but with the nonstandard port found through port scanning as a way to attempt to connect to hosts inside the enterprise.
The sequence lists a summary of some of the steps attackers need to take but does not list every single task. However, even to this depth, you can see how attackers can find a way to send packets past the corporate firewall.
The solution? A next-generation firewall that looks at the application layer data to identify the application instead of relying on the TCP and UDP port numbers used. Cisco performs their deep packet inspection using a feature called Application Visibility and Control (AVC). Cisco AVC can identify many applications based on the data sent (application layer headers plus application data structures far past the TCP and UDP headers). When used with a Cisco NGFW, instead of matching port numbers, the firewall matches the application, defeating attacks like the one just described. The following list mentions a few of the features of an NGFW. Note that while NGFW is a useful term, the line between a traditional firewall and a next-generation firewall can be a bit blurry, as the terms describe products that have gone through repeated changes over long periods of time. This list does summarize a few of the key points, however:
- Traditional firewall: An NGFW performs traditional firewall features, like stateful firewall filtering, NAT/PAT, and VPN termination.
- Application Visibility and Control (AVC): This feature looks deep into the application layer data to identify the application. For instance, it can identify the application based on the data, rather than port number, to defend against attacks that use random port numbers.
- Advanced Malware Protection: NGFW platforms run multiple security services, not just as a platform to run a separate service, but for better integration of functions. A network-based antimalware function can run on the firewall itself, blocking file transfers that would install malware, and saving copies of files for later analysis.
- URL Filtering: This feature examines the URLs in each web request, categorizes the URLs, and either filters or rate limits the traffic based on rules. The Cisco Talos security group monitors and creates reputation scores for each domain known in the Internet, with URL filtering being able to use those scores in its decision to categorize, filter, or rate limit.
- NGIPS: The Cisco NGFW products can also run their NGIPS feature along with the firewall.
Cisco Next-Generation IPS
The Cisco next-generation IPS (NGIPS) products have followed a similar path as the Cisco NGFW products. Cisco first added NGIPS features primarily through its Sourcefire acquisition, with the now-current Cisco IPS products also using the Firepower name. In fact, as a product line, the hardware NGFW and NGIPS products are the same products, with the ability to run both the NGFW and NGIPS. As with the NGFW, the NGIPS adds features to a traditional IPS. For instance, one of the biggest issues with a traditional IPS comes with the volume of security events logged by the IPS. For instance:
- An IPS compares the signature database, which lists all known exploits, to all messages.
- It generates events, often far more than the security staff can read.
- The staff must mentally filter events to find the proverbial needle in the haystack, possible only through hard work, vast experience, and a willingness to dig.
An NGIPS helps with this issue in a couple of ways. First, an NGIPS examines the context by gathering data from all the hosts and the users of those hosts. The NGIPS will know the OS, software revision levels, what apps are running, open ports, the transport protocols and port numbers in use, and so on. Armed with that data, the NGIPS can make much more intelligent choices about what events to log. For instance, consider an NGIPS placed into a network to protect a campus LAN where end users connect, but no data center exists in that part of the network. Also, all PCs happen to be running Windows, and possibly the same version, by corporate policy. The signature database includes signatures for exploits of Linux hosts, Macs, Windows version nonexistent in that part of the network, and exploits that apply to server applications that are not running on those hosts. After gathering those facts, an NGIPS can suggest de-emphasizing checks for exploits that do not apply to those endpoints, spending more time and focus on events that could occur, greatly reducing the number of events logged.
The following list mentions a few of the Cisco NGIPS features:
- Traditional IPS: An NGIPS performs traditional IPS features, like using exploit signatures to compare packet flows, creating a log of events, and possibly discarding and/or redirecting packets.
- Application Visibility and Control (AVC): As with NGFWs, an NGIPS has the ability to look deep into the application layer data to identify the application.
- Contextual Awareness: NGFW platforms gather data from hosts—OS, software version/level, patches applied, applications running, open ports, applications currently sending data, and so on. Those facts inform the NGIPS as to the often more limited vulnerabilities in a portion of the network so that the NGIPS can focus on actual vulnerabilities while greatly reducing the number of logged events.
- Reputation-Based Filtering: The Cisco Talos security intelligence group researches security threats daily, building the data used by the Cisco security portfolio. Part of that data identifies known bad actors, based on IP address, domain, name, or even specific URL, with a reputation score for each. A Cisco NGIPS can perform reputation-based filtering, taking the scores into account.
- Event Impact Level: Security personnel need to assess the logged events, so an NGIPS provides an assessment based on impact levels, with characterizations as to the impact if an event is indeed some kind of attack.