<?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 Port 445 Question in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/port-445-question/m-p/832172#M957152</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;CISCO-PIX-515E:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am NOT exposing port 445 to the internet (as I have no need or disire to do so and am well aware of the security issues) &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- but I have noticed that one of my DMZ hosts (an SSL VPN Server) is trying to pass 445 traffic internally - &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;so my question is...is it also considered to be bad practice to allow port 445 traffic between a DMZ host and an internal host? &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Externally we ONLY allow port 443 to the DMZ Server in question.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 11:47:15 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>fineospaul</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-03-11T11:47:15Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Port 445 Question</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/port-445-question/m-p/832172#M957152</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;CISCO-PIX-515E:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am NOT exposing port 445 to the internet (as I have no need or disire to do so and am well aware of the security issues) &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- but I have noticed that one of my DMZ hosts (an SSL VPN Server) is trying to pass 445 traffic internally - &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;so my question is...is it also considered to be bad practice to allow port 445 traffic between a DMZ host and an internal host? &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Externally we ONLY allow port 443 to the DMZ Server in question.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 11:47:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/port-445-question/m-p/832172#M957152</guid>
      <dc:creator>fineospaul</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T11:47:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Port 445 Question</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/port-445-question/m-p/832173#M957153</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I don't think there is any harm in this since systems on DMZ can't access internal hosts directly.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:16:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/port-445-question/m-p/832173#M957153</guid>
      <dc:creator />
      <dc:date>2008-01-18T21:16:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Port 445 Question</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/port-445-question/m-p/832174#M957154</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is the case that you have the SSL VPN&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Server configured for Windows Domain &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;authentication.  It is trying to use either&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;port 139 (legacy) or port 445 (new) for &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;authenticating users with Domain Authentication.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I do the same thing with my VPN concentrator.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:27:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/port-445-question/m-p/832174#M957154</guid>
      <dc:creator>cisco24x7</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-01-18T21:27:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

