<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Strict TCP Enforcement in Sourcefire in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/strict-tcp-enforcement-in-sourcefire/m-p/3070829#M43096</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Cisco Support Community team&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Currently thinking as a scenario the&amp;nbsp;Sourcefire NIPS are working in &lt;U&gt;Blocking mode (Drop when Inline) option&lt;/U&gt; is enabled in the 'Intrusion Policy'&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Can you please let me know&lt;STRONG&gt; 'Strict TCP Enforcement' feature &lt;/STRONG&gt;in &lt;STRONG&gt;Sourcefire NIPS &lt;/STRONG&gt;can it be implemented&lt;STRONG&gt; Yes &lt;U&gt;or &lt;/U&gt;No , along with its Pros/Cons.&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Do let me know&amp;nbsp;your Recommendations&amp;nbsp; is it worth to implement this Strict TCP Enforcement at Sourcefire NIPS 'or' Cisco ASA firewall 'or' at a DDOS Vendor these days Volumetric attacks come from attackers from Internet.&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Reference url&lt;/STRONG&gt; :&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/firesight/541/user-guide/FireSIGHT-System-UserGuide-v5401/IPS-Devices.html" target="_blank"&gt;&lt;U&gt;http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/firesight/541/user-guide/FireSIGHT-System-UserGuide-v5401/IPS-Devices.html&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Strict TCP Enforcement&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;------------------------------------&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: red;"&gt;To maximize TCP security, you can enable strict enforcement, which "Blocks Connections where the Three-Way Handshake was not completed". &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;U&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: black;"&gt;Strict enforcement also blocks:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;UL&gt;
&lt;LI style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;non-SYN TCP packets&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;U&gt;for connections&lt;/U&gt; &lt;STRONG&gt;where the three-way handshake was not completed&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;non-SYN/RST packets&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;U&gt;from the initiator on a&lt;/U&gt; &lt;STRONG&gt;TCP connection before the responder sends the SYN-ACK&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;non-SYN-ACK/RST packets&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;U&gt;from the responder on a&lt;/U&gt; &lt;STRONG&gt;TCP connection after the SYN but before the session is established&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;SYN packets&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;U&gt;on an established&lt;/U&gt; &lt;STRONG&gt;TCP connection from either the initiator or the responder&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;/UL&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;Regards&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;Chidambara&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 10 Mar 2019 13:47:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>chidambarakodandaraju</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-03-10T13:47:10Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Strict TCP Enforcement in Sourcefire</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/strict-tcp-enforcement-in-sourcefire/m-p/3070829#M43096</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Cisco Support Community team&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Currently thinking as a scenario the&amp;nbsp;Sourcefire NIPS are working in &lt;U&gt;Blocking mode (Drop when Inline) option&lt;/U&gt; is enabled in the 'Intrusion Policy'&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Can you please let me know&lt;STRONG&gt; 'Strict TCP Enforcement' feature &lt;/STRONG&gt;in &lt;STRONG&gt;Sourcefire NIPS &lt;/STRONG&gt;can it be implemented&lt;STRONG&gt; Yes &lt;U&gt;or &lt;/U&gt;No , along with its Pros/Cons.&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Do let me know&amp;nbsp;your Recommendations&amp;nbsp; is it worth to implement this Strict TCP Enforcement at Sourcefire NIPS 'or' Cisco ASA firewall 'or' at a DDOS Vendor these days Volumetric attacks come from attackers from Internet.&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Reference url&lt;/STRONG&gt; :&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/firesight/541/user-guide/FireSIGHT-System-UserGuide-v5401/IPS-Devices.html" target="_blank"&gt;&lt;U&gt;http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/firesight/541/user-guide/FireSIGHT-System-UserGuide-v5401/IPS-Devices.html&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Strict TCP Enforcement&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;------------------------------------&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: red;"&gt;To maximize TCP security, you can enable strict enforcement, which "Blocks Connections where the Three-Way Handshake was not completed". &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;U&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: black;"&gt;Strict enforcement also blocks:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;UL&gt;
&lt;LI style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;non-SYN TCP packets&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;U&gt;for connections&lt;/U&gt; &lt;STRONG&gt;where the three-way handshake was not completed&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;non-SYN/RST packets&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;U&gt;from the initiator on a&lt;/U&gt; &lt;STRONG&gt;TCP connection before the responder sends the SYN-ACK&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;non-SYN-ACK/RST packets&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;U&gt;from the responder on a&lt;/U&gt; &lt;STRONG&gt;TCP connection after the SYN but before the session is established&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;SYN packets&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;U&gt;on an established&lt;/U&gt; &lt;STRONG&gt;TCP connection from either the initiator or the responder&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;/UL&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;Regards&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"&gt;Chidambara&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 10 Mar 2019 13:47:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/strict-tcp-enforcement-in-sourcefire/m-p/3070829#M43096</guid>
      <dc:creator>chidambarakodandaraju</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-10T13:47:10Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

