3 ms·

There was perimeter security in this case. The user diligently configured a white-list only UFW firewall. That is their perimeter. Docker diligently sidesteppe

There was perimeter security in this case. The user diligently configured a white-list only UFW firewall. That is their perimeter. Docker diligently sidestepped that firewall, and in so doing exposed that this was a case of perimeter security. Because by bypassing that single external filter, the entire service was now vulnerable.

closeparen 5y ago
I guess this is hair-splitting semantics, but I think when most people say "perimeter security" in the context of a web production environment, they mean that things like DBs, message queues, and backend services share a private network with the servers that actually terminate user TCP connections. Obviously with only perimeter security, those servers are soft targets to an attacker who compromises a frontend host. I am all for hardening the interior. "Don't put stuff on the internet that doesn't need to be, even if you think it's secure, because it's probably complicated enough for you to be mistaken about that." This is a perimeter security philosophy, and also what OP needed. If anything the host-level firewall mishap seems closer to an application-level authz bypass than to a pivot across a "trustworthy" network.