Segmentation Devices
WLANs pose a unique problem because they do not have
physical barriers and is data broadcast in the air. In general, a WLAN is more
vulnerable to compromise and is less secure than a wired network. This requires
wireless access points to be separated from the wired network by some type of
security device. These devices are generally called segmentation devices and are used when implementing
segmentation between wired and wireless networks. In a WLAN design, segmentation
means placing the wireless access points on a network segment separated from the
backbone network by some type of security device. An example of segmentation is
shown in Figure 10.2. This section
discusses the type of devices generally used for segmentation between WLANs and
wired networks and the strengths and weaknesses of each.
Routers
The strongest level of security supported by a router is a
firewall feature set, which is a strong set of access control lists (ACLs).
Although routers are intelligent, their security functionality is relatively
weak because of the way access lists are used in the device. If a router is used
as a segmentation device, it needs to handle the traffic from approximately 15
to 20 access points, which equates to about 75 to 100 Mbps of throughput because
each access point can push approximately 5 Mbps of wireless traffic. Routers are
not always the best segmentation devices to
use because the types of routers that can handle this volume of traffic are very
expensive, and moderately priced routers generally have slow interfaces because
their CPUs cannot push large amounts of traffic. Most routers use ACLs to ensure
that clients match a predetermined set of criteria. Routers do not use
authentication and are considered a security risk to be avoided in WLAN designs
where authentication is extremely important. As an alternative, Cisco's IOS
router software support for Mobile IP may be used in conjunction with Mobile IP
software packages.
Layer 3
Switches
Layer 3 switches are routers that can perform switching
functions and have many names, such as switch routers, route switches, and
network layer switches. Virtual interfaces that exist logically are added to the
switch as a switching functionality. Network traffic is routed through the Layer
3 switch between virtual interfaces in addition to switching traffic between
physical interfaces mapped to the virtual interfaces.
A Virtual Ethernet Interface (VEI) is a pseudodevice that can be
used as a cloned Ethernet device. VEI will respond to Ethernet packages for an
IP address other than the normal address used for the machine. In this way, it
is possible to have several IP addresses for a single Ethernet interface. Nodes
that are attached to switched interfaces are switched to other interfaces
falling under the same VEI, but they are routed to nodes attached to another
designated port or ports. A number of physical switched interfaces can be
assigned to a logical routed interface. The routed interface will be assigned an
IP address just as the router's interface would be assigned one.
Layer 3 switches normally have fast, distributed CPUs per
port or per block of ports and are somewhat expensive. Security on Layer 3
switches is performed with the use of ACLs
on routed interfaces. Processing of these lists is greatly expedited because the
switches are capable of much greater processing speeds and are much faster and
more versatile than routers. Few Layer 3 switches support Mobile IP, and they
have the same security limitations as routers because they do not provide any
means of authentication.
VPN
Concentrators
VPN concentrators, also known as VPN servers, are the
cornerstones of secure remote access. The ability to scale from supporting just
a few to many thousands of users is made possible through the use of RADIUS or
TACACS+ authentication and multiple types of VPN technologies and protocols. VPN
concentrators build an encrypted point-to-point connection between the client
and the concentrator and block unauthenticated Layer 3 traffic from entering the
backbone segment to prevent malicious eavesdropping. The client and server at
each end of the VPN tunnel must use the same VPN protocol and settings. The
security level of a VPN also depends on the protocols used.
VPN concentrators were never built specifically for use in
wireless environments or as WLAN segmentation devices, and they leave access
points unprotected just like any Layer 3 security device. EWGs with VPN
concentrator functions have been designed for wireless operations and are a much
better choice than using a VPN concentrator independently in a WLAN.
VPN concentrators, whether small or large, are expensive and
are becoming even more so as the requirements for the number of simultaneously
supported VPN tunnels increases. The strong authentication and encryption in
VPNs comes with high overhead costs and decreased throughput. Interoperability
between concentrators and client software should be taken into consideration
during the network design phase. Specific VPN protocol maturity and support
should also be considered.
Firewalls
The use and function of firewalls has evolved rapidly over
the last few years, resulting in an increase in both features and the
granularity with which firewalls can filter traffic. This can cause existing
routers to bottleneck traffic and network throughput to suffer. Firewalls were
initially used to filter traffic between network segments such as the intranet
and the Internet and performed this function well. As high-bandwidth links
became affordable, firewalls were enhanced to keep up with throughput demands
and route and filter between many network segments. Multiport NICs were
introduced into network devices as a result of the introduction of Demilitarized
Zones (DMZs). Other detailed tasks performed
by firewalls were added, such as stateful inspection, to keep intruders out.
The long-running arguments over task-specific firewalls versus
general-purpose firewalls continue. One group maintains that a firewall is the
best device for all filtering situations, while the other group assures its
customers that firewalls should be task-oriented and purposefully designed
units. WLAN security support has generally fallen in the "all-purpose group,"
resulting in expectations of the nearly impossible task of filtering unlike
types of traffic at incredible speeds from a variety of audiences. The
"purpose-built group" segmented firewalls into several different types,
including Internet firewalls, WLAN firewalls, and other task-dependent types.
Stateful inspection and any other type of low-level packet filtering and review
can be performed adequately on a typical Internet firewall that deals with 1.5
and 10 Mbps of Internet traffic. A wireless access point at the same speed
pushes 5 Mbps per AP. Common enterprise WLAN designs consist of 100 or more
access points in a network. If these types of additional burdens are put on the
firewall while minimizing the amount of filtering, they can handle such loads
without causing a bottleneck in the network. A firewall may incorporate
authentication and encryption in the form of an integrated VPN concentrator, but
in so doing, the firewall takes on even more types of functions and traffic.
Authentication requires either RADIUS support or a local database of users and
routing, tunnel building, and data encryption functionality to be added to the
filtering function.
Many organizations use their existing firewalls for WLAN
segmentation because they are already in place before the WLAN is designed or
installed. A firewall certainly has its place and may be part of an overall WLAN
security design, but it is not a good stand-alone solution because WLAN
environments grow rapidly in size and complexity. The best way to use a firewall
to optimize security is to use it in conjunction with other solutions. A
firewall can be used to segment the wireless segment where clients are required
to use an SSH2 client to connect to an SSH2 server located on the backbone
behind the firewall. The firewall can then be used to block all traffic except
SSH2 tunnel traffic destined to the IP address of the SSH2 server, resulting in
greater throughput between the WLAN and the backbone segment of the network
because the overhead of encryption, routing, authentication, firewall
management, and other work can be shared between the SSH2 server and the
firewall.
Enterprise
Encryption Gateways
The Enterprise Encryption Gateway (EEG) serves as a gateway
device because it segments wireless networks from a network's backbone. The
access points and EEGs are managed from the unencrypted segment of the network.
An authentication server such as RADIUS or an Access Control Server (ACS) and a
management station are also used in this configuration.
Ethernet frames that originate from or are routed to the WLAN
segment are taken by EEG Layer 2 encryption devices and placed in proprietary
frame formats that traverse both the wireless and wired segments. This is
identical to the basic Layer 2 VPN design where each link is an encrypted
point-to-point tunnel between the client and the gateway. The Layer 3 to 7
information is removed from the proprietary frame after the traffic arrives at
the gateway and is placed in a standard Ethernet frame for delivery upstream to
the destination station.
EEGs do not perform routing and are assigned an IP address for
management purposes only. Gateways and clients use a proprietary frame format to
compress the data payload for increased throughput. Gains in throughput are
directly related to the amount of payload compression and type of data being
compressed. 3DES or AES algorithms are used when strong encryption is required,
but they significantly increase overhead and latency, thereby reducing
throughput. Noticeable differences in network throughput can be achieved by
mandating the use of compression schemes or by moving encryption and decryption
to a dedicated off-load processor.
EEG supports access point management as part of its configuration
to include the IP and MAC address of each access point behind a gateway.
Depending on the type of tasks that can be performed (e.g., Telnet, HTTP, and
HTTPS), Layer 4 port filtering might be appropriate to implement. A filtered
request sent to an access point or bridge located on the encrypted side of an
EEG will send the traffic unencrypted to the wireless infrastructure device so
the device may properly read the traffic.
RADIUS authentication is supported from EEGs through a
proprietary ACS. To provide seamless integration with an existing environment,
the ACS may redirect authentication requests to a RADIUS server. The ACS
provides added value to the wireless network because it has vendor-specific
security and other management features not found in RADIUS.
Enterprise
Wireless Gateways
EWGs are the end result of the evolution of various
networking hardware and software products to meet a specific set of needs for
wireless networks. The implementation and
management complexities, cost of simultaneous deployment, and weaknesses of
Layer 3 switches, firewalls, routers, and VPN concentrators helped shape the
evolution of the EWG. The EWG combines the features common to all of the
aforementioned devices and additional features specific to wireless networks.
EWGs lack protection for access points and must use a separate security solution
to meet this need.
EWGs are normally used as a gateway positioned between the
wireless network segment and the network backbone through which WLAN clients can
access the network core or backbone. EWGs should reside between VLANs when they
are used to separate WLANs from backbone networks. EWGs act as routers, with one
interface on the unprotected wireless side and the other interface on the
protected wired side, with each interface having its own IP address. It is
possible for NAT to perform in both directions, with each direction having a
different purpose. Because of the high volume of traffic traversing these types
of networks, the interfaces are always Fast Ethernet or Gigabit Ethernet.
Although many EWGs integrate firewall features, it is rare for an
EWG to have a set of features comparable to an enterprise firewall software
package because of costs and the amount of traffic that will traverse the EWG in
comparison to an enterprise firewall. As with regular firewalls, if the
filtering and analysis of inbound and outbound traffic become more complex, the
firewall's ability to process traffic is reduced and the number of
simultaneously supported access points will decrease along with the number of
simultaneously supported wireless clients. An administrator's comfort level with
the EWG firewall features will depend on his or her knowledge of firewall
administration and technology.
The VPN concentrator function acts as the primary security feature
for most EWGs. It provides support for most VPN types to include IPSec, PPTP,
and L2TP. VPN concentrators also integrate IPSec VPN implementations with
diverse feature sets and support for RADIUS, optional local user databases, LDAP
support, and other authentication methods.
The lack of user authentication and authorization found in current
WLAN standards and the unique mobile nature of wireless clients drove the
development of special features in EWGs that are specific to wireless, including
RBAC, rate limiting, and proprietary methods of subnet roaming, discussed later
in this chapter.
There are two main types of EWGs: appliance (hardware) and
software. EWG appliances are stand-alone boxes that may resemble a
rack-mountable PC in a 1U or 2U chassis. EWG software and operating systems are
often combined into one unit running
versions of Linux or FreeBSD operating systems, and they are managed from a
console port or through a Web interface using HTTP, Telnet, HTTPS, or SNMP. A
replacement firmware file, typically in binary format such as .bin, must be
uploaded to the unit through the management interface to upgrade these
units.
The software EWG is the second common type of EWG and can run on a
typical Intel PC with two Ethernet interfaces on top of operating systems such
as Windows and Linux. Some are similar in operation to network appliances and
come with a complete operating system and needed applications. Others have a
master/slave or client/server configuration where one centralized piece of
software controls many client pieces, and those typically run on top of a
Windows or Linux operating system. Software and hardware EWGs each have
disadvantages. Software EWGs require additional costs for an additional
computer(s), and if required, operating system software. This can also introduce
a single point of failure on the network. Hardware EWGs also have higher costs.
Given that the management costs, in terms of time and difficulty, are about the
same for both types, the software solution will probably be the best decision
for those companies that already have the required computer platform(s) and
operating system licenses.
It is important to consider performance during the EWG selection
process. The rather young wireless industry has not had time to standardize the
large variance of interface and management demands among EWG units. Even so,
vendors in this space are targeting large enterprise customers and creating
units that scale to accommodate very large workloads. Performance factors such
as the number of simultaneous users, unencrypted throughput, and encrypted
throughput should be kept in mind when selecting an EWG. The number of
simultaneous user sessions that can be supported by the unit will help determine
the number of EWGs required in an organization. If the machine is supporting the
maximum number of users and all users are active, it is important to know if the
EWG can keep up with the load, or the EWG can become a chokepoint on the
network. Even though the primary purpose of the EWG is authentication and
encryption, most vendors talk about the unencrypted throughput number because it
is more impressive than the figures for encrypted traffic. Depending on the type
of encryption used, the encrypted data throughput number is usually
significantly lower than the unencrypted throughput and far less than the speed
of the interfaces both upstream and downstream. An EWG may have very fast
interfaces, but this does not mean it can push as much traffic as the interfaces
can pass to it.
Scalability of a prospective EWG is another important factor
to consider when designing and implementing a wireless network. Network growth,
standards support, limitation of features, increased number of clients and/ or
access points, increased bandwidth, and technology independent enough to scale
adequately are all issues that can cause an EWG to become a chokepoint if they
have not been factored correctly into the design. Interfaces can be fast enough
to support 802.11b devices, but the CPUs may not be able to keep up with the
increased workload when new technologies become available, such as 802.11a and
802.11g. Colocating 802.11g with 802.11b or replacing 802.11b access points with
802.11a can produce a scenario where the EWG could easily become overloaded if
it was not designed for higher bandwidths. Through firmware or software
upgrades, EWGs should support the latest technologies on the market that
positively affect its ability to scale to the needs of the network. If your EWG
vendor does not keep the firmware or software updated, you may reach a point
where you have to replace the EWGs to grow the network.