<?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 Server Security in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/server-security/m-p/1937044#M55464</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;This is a case of enterprize network design . We normally place couple of servers into a DMZ and those servers have a default gateway pointing towards the firewall interface . Lets say the servers are having a subnet of 10.10.10.0/24 . In a case ServerA wants to access another network he goes to firewall and then data flows as per the route table but in a case where ServerA accesses ServerB it will access directly because of the same subnet e.g. 10.10.10.10 tries to access 10.10.10.20 .&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Which actually means that if ServerA is compromized by an attacker he can upload tools there and launch attacks from that ServerA to ServerB and ServerC .&lt;STRONG&gt; &lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;How can we protect our network in such a situation when the attacker will launch attack from ServerA which goes directly to other servers without going to any layer 3 device . Motive is to protect other servers in case 1 server gets compromized .&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 10 Mar 2019 12:38:17 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>communication.boy</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-03-10T12:38:17Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Server Security</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/server-security/m-p/1937044#M55464</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;This is a case of enterprize network design . We normally place couple of servers into a DMZ and those servers have a default gateway pointing towards the firewall interface . Lets say the servers are having a subnet of 10.10.10.0/24 . In a case ServerA wants to access another network he goes to firewall and then data flows as per the route table but in a case where ServerA accesses ServerB it will access directly because of the same subnet e.g. 10.10.10.10 tries to access 10.10.10.20 .&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Which actually means that if ServerA is compromized by an attacker he can upload tools there and launch attacks from that ServerA to ServerB and ServerC .&lt;STRONG&gt; &lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;How can we protect our network in such a situation when the attacker will launch attack from ServerA which goes directly to other servers without going to any layer 3 device . Motive is to protect other servers in case 1 server gets compromized .&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 10 Mar 2019 12:38:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/server-security/m-p/1937044#M55464</guid>
      <dc:creator>communication.boy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-10T12:38:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Server Security</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/server-security/m-p/1937045#M55466</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;To logically separate servers on one vlans you should use private vlans or protocted ports.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 18 Mar 2012 21:28:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/server-security/m-p/1937045#M55466</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marcin Latosiewicz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-03-18T21:28:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

