Half Of Firewall Rules Configured Improperly, Survey Says

Firewall administration, audit still mostly a manual process, leads to errors and breach risks, reports survey.

Most organizations are still struggling to keep tabs on their firewall operations and changes in the network that require writing new firewall rules, a new study released today reveals.

Around 85% of the 100 network administrators surveyed in Tufin Technologies' 2011 Firewall Management report say that half of their firewall rule changes eventually need to be fixed because of improper setup. Just 7% say their firewall audit processes are automated, and 40% say they spend a month or more per year on handling firewall audits.


More Security Insights

Webcasts

More >>

White Papers

More >>

Reports

More >>

"We were surprised to learn that half the sample is still doing basic tasks manually, such as tightening up permissive rules, looking for shadowed rules, or recertifying rules," said Shaul Efraim, VP of marketing and business development at Tufin. "There is no benefit to having experienced administrators spend their days searching for needles in haystacks."

Close to half of the respondents pinpoint redundant rules manually, while 20% have no process for finding these redundancies. Around 43% say they manage firewall rules manually, and 41% say they don't have a way to determine when a firewall rule must be retired or fixed.

More than 20% say they knew of someone who cheated on a firewall audit, mainly due to lack of time. And 23% have never performed a firewall audit at all.

Close to 30% say it takes them several hours to change a firewall rule, and some 66% say their change management processes leave their organizations prone to breaches due to lack of formal processes (56%) and/or manual processes with too many steps or people in the process (29%).

Read the rest of this article on Dark Reading.

Security professionals often view compliance as a burden, but it doesn't have to be that way. In this report, we show the security team how to partner with the compliance pros. Download the report here. (Free registration required.)

Related Reading




Currently we allow the following HTML tags in comments:

Single tags

These tags can be used alone and don't need an ending tag.

<br> Defines a single line break

<hr> Defines a horizontal line

Matching tags

These require an ending tag - e.g. <i>italic text</i>

<a> Defines an anchor

<b> Defines bold text

<big> Defines big text

<blockquote> Defines a long quotation

<caption> Defines a table caption

<cite> Defines a citation

<code> Defines computer code text

<em> Defines emphasized text

<fieldset> Defines a border around elements in a form

<h1> This is heading 1

<h2> This is heading 2

<h3> This is heading 3

<h4> This is heading 4

<h5> This is heading 5

<h6> This is heading 6

<i> Defines italic text

<p> Defines a paragraph

<pre> Defines preformatted text

<q> Defines a short quotation

<samp> Defines sample computer code text

<small> Defines small text

<span> Defines a section in a document

<s> Defines strikethrough text

<strike> Defines strikethrough text

<strong> Defines strong text

<sub> Defines subscripted text

<sup> Defines superscripted text

<u> Defines underlined text

InformationWeek encourages readers to engage in spirited, healthy debate, including taking us to task. However, InformationWeek moderates all comments posted to our site, and reserves the right to modify or remove any content that it determines to be derogatory, offensive, inflammatory, vulgar, irrelevant/off-topic, racist or obvious marketing/SPAM. InformationWeek further reserves the right to disable the profile of any commenter participating in said activities.

Disqus Tips To upload an avatar photo, first complete your Disqus profile. | View the list of supported HTML tags you can use to style comments. | Please read our commenting policy.
Subscribe to RSS

Resource Links