Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Partner Perspectives  Connecting marketers to our tech communities.
3/23/2015
11:36 AM
Rees Johnson
Rees Johnson
Partner Perspectives
50%
50%

Protect Your Web Applications

Reverse proxies are critical to shield Web apps from external attacks.

Many organizations today are concerned about how to safely provide customers, employees, and vendors access to their Web applications safely. They need to protect their internal assets against external malware attacks. Every day we read new horror stories in the press about hackers who use phishing emails and drive-by malware downloads to steal money, identities, and sensitive internal documents.

Blocking this type of attack requires a combination of technologies. Email protection software is the key technology to help protects users against phishing emails, while a traditional Web gateway acts as a proxy to protect endpoint systems from malware, sites with poor reputations, and unauthorized exfiltration of protected content.

These tools generally protect against attacks launched against your end users. Conversely, if you need to provide a Web service to external users such as customers or business partners, how do you protect that system against attack?

To do that, you need a reverse proxy.

In a typical reverse proxy configuration, the proxy intercepts Web traffic that an external user is attempting to upload. At this point, complete malware scanning and even DLP rules can be applied to protect the company from both malicious files and incidental private user data being uploaded inadvertently. The proxy only allows clean data in, while blocking attacks, malware, and suspicious data.

In certain use cases, it may make sense to configure the Web server to use an application using the Internet Content Adaptation Protocol (ICAP) to redirect traffic to a separate malware scanning device for analysis. The ICAP scenario enables the Web server to treat the incoming content with greater flexibility.

Whether you chose a reverse proxy or the ICAP route, your organization enjoys multiple benefits:

  • You can securely expose internal enterprise applications to users outside of the corporate network without the need for a VPN.
  • You can authenticate user identity and apply authorizations before granting access to the Web server.
  • You can dynamically distribute the workload of a large user environment across multiple servers.
  • You can offload CPU-intensive tasks, optimizing Web server performance.

Using this type of configuration improves overall security, while allowing those outside the firewall who require access to critical applications to get it. Productivity is enhanced, without jeopardizing security.

Rees Johnson is Senior Vice President and General Manager of the Content Security Business Unit at Intel Security, which includes Web Security, Email Security, and Data Loss Prevention technology.  Rees and his team are in charge of securing the most utilized vectors of ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
News
Inside the Ransomware Campaigns Targeting Exchange Servers
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  4/2/2021
Commentary
Beyond MITRE ATT&CK: The Case for a New Cyber Kill Chain
Rik Turner, Principal Analyst, Infrastructure Solutions, Omdia,  3/30/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
2021 Top Enterprise IT Trends
We've identified the key trends that are poised to impact the IT landscape in 2021. Find out why they're important and how they will affect you today!
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2015-20001
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-11
In the standard library in Rust before 1.2.0, BinaryHeap is not panic-safe. The binary heap is left in an inconsistent state when the comparison of generic elements inside sift_up or sift_down_range panics. This bug leads to a drop of zeroed memory as an arbitrary type, which can result in a memory ...
CVE-2020-36317
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-11
In the standard library in Rust before 1.49.0, String::retain() function has a panic safety problem. It allows creation of a non-UTF-8 Rust string when the provided closure panics. This bug could result in a memory safety violation when other string APIs assume that UTF-8 encoding is used on the sam...
CVE-2020-36318
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-11
In the standard library in Rust before 1.49.0, VecDeque::make_contiguous has a bug that pops the same element more than once under certain condition. This bug could result in a use-after-free or double free.
CVE-2021-28875
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-11
In the standard library in Rust before 1.50.0, read_to_end() does not validate the return value from Read in an unsafe context. This bug could lead to a buffer overflow.
CVE-2021-28876
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-11
In the standard library in Rust before 1.52.0, the Zip implementation has a panic safety issue. It calls __iterator_get_unchecked() more than once for the same index when the underlying iterator panics (in certain conditions). This bug could lead to a memory safety violation due to an unmet safety r...