Slashdot Mirror


Hardware Firewall On a USB Key

An anonymous reader writes "An Israeli startup has squeezed a complete hardware firewall into a USB key. The 'Yoggie Pico' from Yoggie Systems runs Linux 2.6 along with 13 security applications on a 520MHz PXA270, an Intel processor typically used in high-end smartphones. The Pico works in conjunction with Windows XP or Vista drivers that hijack traffic at network layers 2-3, below the TCP/IP stack, and route it to USB, where the Yoggie analyzes and filters traffic at close-to-100Mbps wireline speeds. The device will hit big-box retailers in the US this month at a price of $180." Linux and Mac drivers are planned, according to the article.

45 of 203 comments (clear)

  1. Not really a hardware firewall by dreamchaser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A true hardware firewall wouldn't have to hijack traffic via a driver. It would have it's own ethernet port and would inspect data before it even touches the network stack on the host OS.

    A bit hyped up if you ask me.

    1. Re:Not really a hardware firewall by nine-times · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, that was my thought. If you're plugging the ethernet into your computer and relying on software to route traffic to this device in the first place, how is this better than software firewalls?

    2. Re:Not really a hardware firewall by bobo+mahoney · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It might not offer better protection than a software firewall, but it will offload the work to it's own processor freeing up cycles on your computer. If you are pushing your machine this could be a fairly inexpensive way to squeeze a little more life out of an older /underpowered box.

      --
      Bobo Mahoney
    3. Re:Not really a hardware firewall by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why not just put an ethernet controller into it, and use it as a USB network adaptor?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:Not really a hardware firewall by larkost · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Except that all of your traffic is now going over your USB port twice... and the USB port is your most processor-intensive I/O. I have no idea how the numbers will work out... but there is a good chance that this will eat a lot of processor time.

    5. Re:Not really a hardware firewall by MattskEE · · Score: 2, Informative

      That is why Yoggie also offers the Gatekeeper, which does exactly what you want.

      The new device was created because a USB interface is less cumbersome and less expensive, while still offering a similar feature set and only somewhat reduced security.

    6. Re:Not really a hardware firewall by kasperd · · Score: 5, Informative

      Why not just put an ethernet controller into it, and use it as a USB network adaptor?
      I think that is exactly the point the grandparent was trying to make. If it had an actual ethernet interface you would only have to transfer the packets over the USB interface once, thus you'd reduce the load on the machine. You'd also get better security since the machine would no longer be connected to the network without going through the firewall. You'd avoid hacking the network stack, and the result would be something working on more systems without the need for special drivers. And you'd free up the ethernet port on the machine, so it could also be used in situations where the machine did not have exactly as many ethernet connections as you'd want. Basically adding a real ethernet interface to this gadget would have increased its value by at least a factor of two.
      --

      Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
    7. Re:Not really a hardware firewall by hattig · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Basically adding a real ethernet interface to this gadget would have increased its value by at least a factor of two.

      and useless when the laptop user connects to the internet via their GPRS card, or their Bluetooth enabled phone, or via wireless ...

      This device works with all of them, it could only be better if they made it in an ExpressCard format, which I'm sure is in their plans.

    8. Re:Not really a hardware firewall by smart_ass · · Score: 2

      Anyone even RTFA ...
      They had a previous with ethernet ports. This thing is a (FORWARD-thinking) change from this to reduce physical size.
      For a large percentage of the real world, having drivers that allow it to work on Windows only is sufficient.

      --
      Ouch ... did I just say that.
  2. odd by otacon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Did anyone else find it odd that it runs linux, but doesn't actually work with a linux box, but only with a windows one?

    --
    In a world of acronyms, the words are the real victims.
    1. Re:odd by BosstonesOwn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Odd or ironic ?

      I find it Ironic personally that the linux device can easily hijack packets from a windows stack but the driver to hijack the traffic from the mac or linux boxes are still not ready.

      The true question at this point is who can't steal hijack packets from a windows box.

      --
      This package Does Not Contain a Winner
    2. Re:odd by Josiah_Bradley · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If it's running Linux then you can probably get the same apps it's running and install them on your Linux machine. And if your already running Linux you probably don't need a firewall for windows anyway...

    3. Re:odd by jcgf · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's not as odd as you think. There have been several routers and such which either require you run a config program on a windows box or access them using a browser which had to be IE, despite the router itself running Linux.

    4. Re:odd by Deadplant · · Score: 2, Informative

      Perhaps, but the US, Israel, Russia and China together manage to do a startling amount of shady shit.
      Their efforts really do put the rest of the world to shame (er, maybe i mean the opposite of that)

      That being said; the fact that this product was developed in Israel is not a reason to avoid it.
      *That* being said; the fact that this security product relies on closed-source binary drivers and runs on XP *IS* a reason to avoid it.

      I would trust this product about as much I would trust Norton or Mcafee.

    5. Re:odd by Ant+P. · · Score: 3, Funny

      Not odd at all. Windows is the only desktop OS in use today that needs a device like this.

  3. Why would I want this? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I mean, increasingly, firewalls are being combined into multipurpose devices that provide NAT, Web serving, DMZ, VPN, media streaming, wireless access, etc. I mean even the lowly Linksys WRT54G, available for ~$50 USD almost anywhere, supports VPN, provides NAT, DMZ, UPnP capabilities, rudimentary web filtering, and has a built-in wireless access point. I mean, this thing doesn't even support wireless, which would make it useful for laptops, etc.

    IOW, someone tell me why I should care?

    1. Re:Why would I want this? by toleraen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Because you can plug it into your laptop if you're at a local hotspot? Think mobility + offloading processing. Not exactly the most useful of devices, but for someone who's constantly at the mercy of free/public wifi it could be convenient.

    2. Re:Why would I want this? by richardtallent · · Score: 5, Informative

      Just like software firewalls, this is just snake oil for feeble-minded people who don't realize that firewalls are for blocking access *between* networks, not for closing ports that shouldn't be open in the first place on individual machines.

    3. Re:Why would I want this? by fishybell · · Score: 5, Informative
      According to their nifty flowchart it supports whatever windows supports. It takes the inbound traffic after the hardware receives it, but before the TCP/IP stack. It sits in the same place as a software firewall, but offloads the calculations and filtering to the dongle's cpu.

      Why would anyone want this? Well, a router that combines firewall, nat, vpn, etc. is fine for home use, but what about the coffee shop? For a mobile computer having a on-computer firewall is a must. As far as why anybody would choose to use this over any software firewall... I can only assume it's for people who don't want yet another piece of software hogging their cpu. Most software firewalls aren't that intensive, but if you're looking to free up that 3-5% of your resources, hardware is the way to do it. Of course, without a benchmark showing a difference, the actual performance increase is lost in the market speak.

      --
      ><));>
    4. Re:Why would I want this? by leather_helmet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For a mobile computer having a on-computer firewall is a must...

      Very much agreed - At first glance I dismissed the product but then realized that it would be great for the laptop that I am typing away on now. Yes, there are software solutions etc. but having a dongle that I can take from one machine to another would be awesome - Potentially I no longer have to install firewalls on each and every computer that I use

    5. Re:Why would I want this? by Kam+Solusar · · Score: 5, Funny

      Heck, for half that price you could buy a little router and carry it with you! And in many parts of the world you could even get a little guy to carry it for you too!
      --
      The Angels have the Phone Box
  4. Not too bad by NickisGod.com · · Score: 5, Funny

    My favorite is the "Layer-8" security engine (Patent pending).

    That's where all of my clients' problems come from.

    -Nick

  5. 100Mbps on USB? by cravey · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I keep wondering how they put such a fast processor on a usb stick and then squirt bidirectional 100Mbps over the USB port. Sounds a lot like my former boss trying to convince me that our building would give us 100Mbps internet for only $50/month. I dislike misleading articles and I dislike misleading product descriptions even more.

    It seems much more likely that there's an app on the USB stick tht is run by the windows machine making the USB stick just a different delivery mechanism than a CD/DVD. Probably way cheaper to produce, update and ship.

  6. Marketing Gimmick by dreamchaser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's a marketing gimmick. At the very best it's a software firewall with a (not really needed) co-processor to do packet inspection.

    Personally it looks like a waste of money to me.

  7. from the article by MarcoAtWork · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Once running, the Pico establishes an SSL (secure sockets layer) http connection to Yoggie's central servers, where it checks for updated firewall policies and rule sets, Touboul said. It subsequently checks every every five minutes, by default.


    so basically this means allowing a black box to hijack completely my IP stack, a black box which phones home every 5 minute and arbitrarily downloads software updates... just think if this company's server was compromised even for an hour, given that all of the devices update every 5 minutes you could compromise pretty much all of them at the same time.

    Not to mention that if this device can insert a 'low level driver' that hijacks the IP stack, I'm sure a virus will come up sooner or later that will re-hijack this and compromise it. The only really 'safe' hardware firewall is, guess what, a completely separate hardware firewall (like my custom LEAF install on my old p3-500), this sounds like those 'one time pad, guaranteed!' crypto products we often lambast here on /.

    --
    -- the cake is a lie
  8. You shouldn't by dreamchaser · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's a hyped up device that nobody really needs. We're posting in a Slashvertisment thread after all.

  9. Re:Why? by rickkas7 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Software firewalls are hardly performance hogs.

    You've obviously never used Norton Internet Security 2007 or McAfee Internet Security Suite 2007.

  10. Huh? That's not a hardware firewall! by gnuman99 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It is just another type of a software firewall. A hardware firewall has at least one input and one output jack (unless it is some weird VLAN firewall). The firewall then checks the packets *before* they get to the hardware that processes them.

    Here we have a software layers shunting packets for filtering to another "device" and then they are probably reinjected. The software layer that does this shunting and re-injecting of packets makes this not a hardware firewall.

    Or are we saying that iptables is a hardware firewall as well?

  11. Hardware firewall definition by sverrehu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Eh, could someone please define the term "hardware firewall"?

    1. Re:Hardware firewall definition by griffjon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      RTFA - it's obviously any doohicky that plugs in to your computer-thingamajig.

      I mean, it's a cool idea/system, but... uh, not really a "hardware" firewall if it needs client system software to route to it..

      --
      Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
    2. Re:Hardware firewall definition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      A hardware firewall is a firewall that runs on separate hardware from the hosts that it protects. In other words, it's a software firewall on a dedicated machine, which may or may not have specialized packet-filtering hardware. The "hardware/software" distinction made by marketeers isn't really important; more significant is the distinction between "network firewalls" and "host firewalls". Network firewalls are separate devices that are capable of filtering all traffic entering or leaving a network of multiple computers; host firewalls are limited to the traffic entering or leaving a single host, and are normally tightly integrated with that host's operating system.

      This gimmick consists of a coprocessor and some low level operating system drivers, and appears to be primarily designed as a host firewall. It might be useful in a network firewall, it the operating system components could be ported to an operating system adequate to the task.

    3. Re:Hardware firewall definition by qwijibo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A piece of hardware that plugs in between your computer and your internet connection. Ie, not this product.

  12. Re:something similar but better... by Dan+Ost · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.gumstix.com/ might be what you're thinking about.

    --

    *sigh* back to work...
  13. USB2, yes. by RingDev · · Score: 4, Informative

    Uhh, USB2 runs at 480Mbps and in practice can push 40MBps (320Mbps) for bulk transfer (ie USB Hard drives).

    So for them to claim that this device can push 100Mbps really isn't that surprising. So long as the little processor can burn through the logic checks fast enough, the bus can definitely handle the load.

    -Rick

    --
    "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    1. Re:USB2, yes. by theRiallatar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Assuming there isn't one or more of the following also attached to the same USB Bus. Wired/Wireless Mouse Printer Keyboard Digital Camera USB Flash Drive etc

  14. Re:Troll! by Pojut · · Score: 5, Funny

    They are like you in every way, except for one thing: They remember to actually click "Post Anonymously"

  15. holy hackable hardware, batman! by radarsat1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    firewall schmirewall, I can't wait to see what "wrong" things people do with this.. a Linux machine on a USB stick? For 180$? Awesome.

    1. Re:holy hackable hardware, batman! by dfries · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I should get one of these. It would be great. I have this 486DX-133 playing ogg vorbis audio files and it isn't fast enough for the highest quality music. It does have a PCI USB 2.0 card in it, it would just be awesome having a 520MHz USB key doing the decoding. It would just be so backward nobody would believe me having the USB key being the CPU and the computer being storage and I/O. Goofy.

  16. Lotsa useless negativity by ushering05401 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There is a niche for this thing... a very small one, but it is there.

    I, for one, might look into owning one of these. After all, I spend a shitload of time working on client machines trying to isolate and diagnose problems. Being able to plug in a USB key to emulate the hardware firewall the client *should* have would be helpful. Notice, I said emulate, not duplicate.

    Just because it is on the front page of /. does not mean it is supposed to save the world.

    Regards.

  17. Re:Why? by Terrasque · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comparing those products to a firewall?

    That's like comparing a normal handgun to an ED-209 on a rampage.

    --
    It's The Golden Rule: "He who has the gold makes the rules."
  18. Apparently we all didn't actually RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Because if we had, then we might have noticed that this little device incorporates anti-virus software. Why do you care? I'll tell you why: because that eliminates one of the biggest annoyances for windows users since Clippy.

    Anti-virus software always slows down your PC. No matter what. It has to because it scans each and every file as its accessed (assuming resident scanner operations).

    This little gem allows me to not bother with installing any anti-virus software and just offload that function to a little firewall thingy that plugs into my laptop.

    To me, this is huge.

    1. Re:Apparently we all didn't actually RTFA by Mr.+Roadkill · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How can it possibly duplicate the functionality of regular AV software that has hooks in the file system and email clients? It can't possibly do all that.
      You're quite correct about the filesystem checks... it can't do those.


      For email, though, it could be quite decent - provided the signatures are kept current, and/or are broad enough to pick up new variants of some of the more common varieties. Many AV products set up POP, IMAP and SMTP proxies (although this looks like it only does SMTP and POP)... your mail client talks to a proxy, which scans inbound and outbound traffic and works the appropriate voodoo in the event of something nasty being discovered. It looks like it also checks web traffic too. This offloads the scanning to a dedicated piece of hardware, which is less likely to get subverted if or when something nasty makes its way onto John Q. Shouldshowermore's computer - you know, the guy who doesn't really know what he's doing and goes out looking for warez or b00b13zp1cs and gets a nasty case of the Russian Mafia from a dodgy website? Um, your neighbour? Yeah, him.

      Of course, I'd probably still recommend using at least a free AV product on the machine... belt AND braces AND duct tape are better than belt alone, and there's always a window of opportunity between when new malware is released and when it's picked up by various scanner... and it makes sense to have something on the machine that can clean up after something nasty gets in. Sure, it's a terrific idea, but I wouldn't recommend it INSTEAD of AV software on the PC... it'll be great at offloading mail and web traffic scanning, and providing anti-phishing functionality, but it can't replace the basic "Whoops, caught something nasty after looking at something I shouldn't have - clean it for me" functionality of desktop AV software.

      That said... it's cool, and there's a niche. I can't wait for some Chinese manufacturer to start including that kind of functionality in network cards. Filtering in your router, filtering in your NIC, desktop AV software (with the mailscanning turned off) - sounds like a combination made in heaven for people who just want their stuff to work without having to think about it too much.

  19. It's just Killer.NIC on USB by DrYak · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They just basically just invented the USB equivalent of the Killer.NIC :
    a small embed router + a driver that directly taps into the WinXP TCP/IP stack (instead of having the packets go through the whole stack then over a short "virtual" network link to the router then up to TCP/IP again, then routing, then back to Ethernet then on the "actual" cable).

    My only though : Is it programmable ? Could it be reflashed to function as something else more creative and be powered from a wall-socket USB 5v power brick ?

    Could be a nice source of Gum-Stick-PC grade board for building fun gadgets.

    (I, for one, welcome our USB-thumb-drive-sized newest electronic gizmo).

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  20. Mod up. by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 2, Informative

    (*eyeroll*)
    The point of the article (if anyone bothered to read it) was the miniaturization feat... 12 LAYER PCB!

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  21. I am from Yoggie: Critial information disclosed by SST · · Score: 3, Informative

    Dear All, Yes, I am from Yoggie and its a pleasure and honor for me to provide some "internal" information: Some of you mentioned that you need 2 network ports to make a "real" Firewall. True, please refer to our web site: www.yoggie.com and find the Yoggie Gatekeeper. This product released few months ago comes with two network ports running same processor, same memory, OS and 13 application. Some of you, view Yoggie as a Firewall and compare it to Routers and access points: Please note that Yoggie is by far more than just a Firewall and in fact its like a set of enterprise security appliances packed in a miniature computer. Lets see what's in there: 1. FireWall, NAT, DHCP Server and client 2. Full snort implementation including IPS on top. VRT updates will come soon. 3. 4 transparent proxies: 2 for web: HTTP, FTP and 2 for email: SMTP and POP3 4. True File-Type detection agent so file type are detected by content analysis and not based on MIME or file extension! Compressed file - are uncompressed in real time before scanning!!! 5. Anti Virus agent - Kasperski! 6. Anti Spyware agent - both signature based and behavior based! 7. Anti Phishing - since it sees the web and email traffic - it can "close the phissing loop" and verify content/url. 8. anti SPAM - based on Mailshell engine. 9. URL CAT and parental control - based on SurfControl. 10. Layer 8 agent - performs content scanning to "above layer 7" applications, AJAX, VBS, JS, etc. to detect new and unknown virus (not based on signature). 11. MLA - Multi Layer Security agent - a new invention - event correlation in REAL TIME for all event from all other modules - to drastically reduce false positive of IPS and Layer 8 agent. 12. VPN Client. These applications take 35% - 45% of PC Windows CPU. More, one cannot find a commercial implementation of all these applications in one security appliance, even when it comes to a 1U, 2U or 4U appliance. Simply, no one yet managed to integrate layer 2/3 security with layer 7 and above layer 7 content analysis. Yoggie is a unique combination of 7-8 commercial different security appliances. Why did we come with the Yoggie PICO? and why after Gatekeeper: First, we wanted to provide the experts with a 2 network ports solution: we launched the Yoggie Gatekeeper. After we came with this great invention that one can implement an *almost* identical solution using *s-route driver* at the lowest level that still NAT (yes, this is the first NAT and DHCP service inside a protected driver and in between network layers) IP address so external IP address is different from IP addresses Windows application gets. This unique implementation is the only one capable stopping attacks such as "ARP cache poisoning" - something only hardware based firewalls can do. (will go via software firewalls). We absolutely agree that Yoggie Gatekeeper using two network interfaces provides the ultimate separation and isolation but we also know that Yoggie PICO unique "S-Route driver" is by far better than software firewall. Why we didn't add network port to PICO ? - we let this choice with the Gatekeeper (for people that absolutely requires two ports) and made an alternative with almost same security level but with a much smaller form factor (easy to carry)and using the existing network port in the laptop. Your comments and suggestions are welcome. SST.