[THIN] Re: Web Interface 2.0
- From: "Parker, Dennis" <Dennis.Parker@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "'thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 12:15:41 -0700
In this configuration I would also recommend changing to a non-standard
port, so when 1494 is compromised, you won't have quite as much risk.
It does come with it's own set of issues of course, but nothing
insurmountable so far.
Dennis Parker, MCSE, CCA
Senior Systems Analyst
Fiserv EFT/CNS
4550 SW Macadam Ave, Ste 100
Portland, Or. 97239
Direct: 503-274-6785
Fax: 503-274-6619
This e-mail is confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you
have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please
notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from
your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or
disclose its contents to any other person. To do so could violate
state and Federal privacy laws.
Thank you for your cooperation. Please contact me if you need
assistance.
_____
From: Robert K Coffman Jr - Info From Data Corporation
[mailto:bcoffman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 11:57 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Web Interface 2.0
I don't run WI but I do run NFuse Classic - the only thing the clients
need is for your servers to have 1494 open to the internet. NFuse
server needs to be able to reach the Citrix XML service (usually on port
80) though.
1494 hasn't been compromised yet.... I'm sure it will be some day.
- Bob Coffman
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
Behalf Of Matthew Shrewsbury
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 12:04 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Web Interface 2.0
Again thanks so much for the tips!!! I am also reading the documentation
right now...
I am weighting up both options. Can someone give me insight on the
following?
1) If I run Web Interface only with SSL cert (Nfuse classic kind of
install, no CSG or STA) do I need to open more then port 1494 on each
Metaframe XP server? Something in my memory is telling me that I have to
open another port to connect to a published application (I might be
thinking of browser 1604).
I have only two Metaframe XP servers and I don't like the idea of having
to install IIS on one of them to run STA (I like to keep each Metaframe
with minum applications). Also with the complexity of CSG/STA I am
currently leaning towards just Web Interface because I really need this
to run today. However I do greatly like the the extra level of security
and avoiding opening 1494 to the public.
Matthew Shrewsbury, MCSE+Internet MCSE 2000 CCA
Network Administrator
-----Original Message-----
From: Cornfield, Scott [mailto:Scott.Cornfield@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 11:49 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Web Interface 2.0
Mat,
Golden rule is never have your STA beside your CSG. Put it on a farm
server!
Scott
_____
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Gentry, Jim (Seta)
Sent: 04 August 2004 16:36
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Web Interface 2.0
The STA runs as a service. Run WI and CSG on same box in DMZ. Pick a
server behind your firewall and install the STA. They is no performance
impact on the existing server to run theSTA
-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Shrewsbury [mailto:MShrewsbury@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 11:23 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Web Interface 2.0
We have a good firewall and the Web server will be located in the DMZ
behind that. I need to run on this server Citrix Web Interface, Citrix
Secure Gateway, and Secure Ticket Authority. Do you think I can run all
3 on the same server? From reading the link it seems to be possible.
Thanks for all your help:-)
Matthew Shrewsbury, MCSE+Internet MCSE 2000 CCA
Network Administrator
-----Original Message-----
From: Cornfield, Scott [mailto:Scott.Cornfield@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 11:08 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Web Interface 2.0
If you only have one server then it should be the CSG. It should be
stand alone in a DMZ and securely locked down within an inch of its life
:-) When I say DMZ even a good Access Control Lists on your routers
would be fine, although I know nothing about Comms!
The STA component could be on one of the Farm servers.
Check this out,
http://support.citrix.com/kb/entry!default.jspa?categoryID=185
<http://support.citrix.com/kb/entry!default.jspa?categoryID=185&entryID=
2843&fromSearchPage=true> &entryID=2843&fromSearchPage=true
Cheers
Scott
_____
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Matthew Shrewsbury
Sent: 04 August 2004 15:55
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Web Interface 2.0
Thank you for your input!!!
I like the idea of using CSG because I don't have to open up port 1494
to the outside world.
1) Our system is low budget and I just can't afford another server to
run STA on. Do you think I could run it on the Web Interface/CSG server
or on my Metaframe datastore server?
2) If I can't do option 1 then I think I should just run Web Interface
and skip the CSG/STA option. If I do this how can I force "128Bit Only"
for external users?
Thanks again for all your help....I am reading the latest Administrator
guides now.
Matthew Shrewsbury, MCSE+Internet MCSE 2000 CCA
Network Administrator
-----Original Message-----
From: Cornfield, Scott [mailto:Scott.Cornfield@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 10:08 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Web Interface 2.0
You can have your Secure Gateway and Nfuse / Web Interface on the one
server. Install your SSL cert on this server and put it in your DMZ,
only allow access to port 443 on the CSG.
The only issue here is that you have an additional server which acts as
a Secure Ticket Authority to support the CSG - the STA should sit
outside the DMZ beside the farm. You have the option of letting the CSG
talk to the STA on port 80, or you can install a SSL cert on the STA as
well.
You can publish you application with standard security settings, as the
CSG will encrypt all the traffic using 128 bit SSL. The users never need
to connect directly to the farm servers.
Cheers,
Scott
_____
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Matthew Shrewsbury
Sent: 04 August 2004 14:29
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Web Interface 2.0
I am slightly out of touch with Citrix XP Web Interface (I have used
NFuse not Web Interface). My goal is to have a company portal all users
can hit both internal and external to access Citrix applications.
Solution:
1) Single web server running Windows 2003, IIS6 and Citrix Web
Interface.
2) Purchase SSL cert to secure all web traffic to and from Citrix Web
Interface.
3) Open 1494 ports into to each Citrix server from the internet.
4) Configure Web Interface for "128Bit only" for ICA traffic
Questions:
1) Do I need secure gateway? What is secure gateway all about?
2) Can I configure Citrix Web Interface to force "128bit only" for
external users and only use "128bit logon only" for internal users? I
don't want to publish applications twice.
I was planning to read up on this but now I have been told this needs to
be done right now...(my manager never sticks to the schedule).
Thanks for any help!!!
Matthew Shrewsbury, MCSE+Internet MCSE 2000 CCA
Network Administrator
Coscan Homes LLC
C 5555 Anglers Avenue, Suite 1A
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33312
* Direct 954.620.1052
* mshrewsbury@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:mshrewsbury@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Information in this email may be privileged, confidential and is
intended exclusively for the addressee. The views expressed may
not be official policy, but the personal views of the originator.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by return
e-mail and delete it from your system. You should not reproduce,
distribute, store, retransmit, use or disclose its contents to anyone.
Please note we reserve the right to monitor all e-mail
communication through our internal and external networks.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
.
.
Other related posts:
