Originally posted by dottom
Hmm... all of my Checkpoint configs ran on Solaris boxes. I've only seen Unix configs of Checkpoint. There are a variety of Unix flavors. I believe Checkpoint's Windows port came after the purchased another company during the Internet bubble to offer a low-end solution to the small businesses of the world. Checkpoint has been an enterprise-class vendor from the begging.
Pffft, Firewalls that run under ANYTHING but the most scaled down OS is a joke, period. The VERY fact that Checkpoint EVEN considers writing a FW to Windows shows they are morons.
Sure, I can build an unbreakable iptables firewall too. Been there, done that.
WTF? you think that the language used to describe the rules is more important than the stateful packet inspection that goes on? Who the hell cares if I write a poem in spanish or in french?
Unfortunately, as much as I love open source, when it comes to an enterprise class environment with enterprise accountability, you have to go with best-of-breed hardware and software. Do you see any of the enterprise class co-location facilities offering iptables as a managed firewall? No, they all offer Checkpoint as the first offering.
Dude, now you are showing how little you know. The largest Internet site in the World is run on FreeBSD - YAHOO. Until recently, Microsoft couldn't even use it's own software to handle its own e-mail - they used FreeBSD. Apple, who has INFINETLY more taste than anything Microsoft has ever produced (actually, I am seriously impressed with .NET and c#) runs OS.X - what do you think that is - FREEBSD!!!
In case you haven't noticed, Apache, AN OPENSOURCE PRODUCT, runs more than half the web servers in the world.
The reason large companies choose a commercial product over an OpenSource one isn't because the commercial product is better, hardly, it is because what they are really purchasing is the expertise and the support that goes with the product. IBM installs LINUX on HUGE projects - who the fuck cares that it is LINUX, which is 100 times better than Win2K - it is just that it is backed by IBM Global Services, and if something goes wrong, which will happen about 1/10 the number of times it would be if it were on Windows, IBM is there to get it fixed.
Microsoft is scared shitless of Linux (which is about 1/5 as good as FreeBSD currently.) Sun is scared shitless of Linux. Pluhease drop this before I really get pissed.
Perhaps you did not read what I said above. ALL FIREWALL VENDORS START WITH OPENBSD KERNEL AND OS, THEN PRETTY IT UP FOR THE END USER - I can't even count the number of OpenSource projects that are commercial products that are just that, OpenSource prettied up.
When I put in the one of the largest ecommerce installation that Exodus has ever seen (we leased 1/3 of the floor in Exodus's largest CA facility), I would get laughed out the building if I try to put in iptables. When you have to survive best-of-breed due diligence you have to use best-of-breed products and Checkpoint is clearly the leading vendor.
I don't want to get into an off topic debate on firewall vendors, or enterprise class vs. open source debate either. My point was to reply to your comment that "Checkpoint is a joke."
Checkpoint is a joke, and when the stock goes to ZERO, the rest of the world will see that as well.
Now if you have something to say on topic regarding one of the three potential configs that the original poster was likely referring to, that may be more useful.
Dude, there is no WAY _YOU_ did any such thing. Anyone who calls NAT a firewall has no clue. You probably had a bunch of Windows Certified idiots that told you this junk and you bought into it.
As far as "staying on topic," I have no problem with it as long as statements like "NAT is a firewall" STOP.
nitro