Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Cisco PIX

The Cisco PIX (Private Internet eXchange) was a series of dedicated appliances developed by Systems, first introduced in 1994, that provided stateful packet inspection ing and to enable secure connectivity between private internal networks and the public . These appliances operated using a proprietary adaptive security that tracked connection states to permit return traffic while blocking unauthorized inbound access, distinguishing them from earlier packet-filtering firewalls through their ability to inspect packet payloads and maintain session integrity. PIX models, ranging from small-office units like the PIX 501 to enterprise-scale devices such as the PIX 525 and , delivered high-throughput —up to gigabit speeds in higher-end variants—while concealing internal network structures from external threats and supporting features like cut-through proxy authentication for enhanced . The platform's software evolved across versions, incorporating VPN support, clustering, and integration with Cisco's IOS-like , which facilitated rapid deployment in diverse network environments. As one of the pioneering commercial IP firewalls, PIX achieved widespread adoption in corporate settings during the late 1990s and early 2000s, contributing significantly to Cisco's dominance in before being phased out in favor of the more versatile Adaptive Security Appliance () line. Cisco declared end-of-sale for the PIX 500 series in 2008, with end-of-support marking the cessation of software updates and technical assistance by July 2013, after which users were encouraged to migrate to or subsequent platforms for continued protection against evolving threats.

History and Development

Origins and Initial Release

The Cisco PIX (Private eXchange) firewall originated from Network Translation, Inc. (NTI), a startup founded in the early to address the limitations of IPv4 address scarcity and the need for secure connectivity for private networks. NTI developed the initial PIX technology as a dedicated combining (NAT) with basic capabilities, enabling organizations to masquerade internal IP addresses behind a single public one while filtering traffic. This innovation was driven by the rapid expansion of the , where traditional router-based lists proved inadequate for stateful security. On October 27, 1995, Systems announced its acquisition of NTI for an undisclosed amount, viewing the technology as essential for bolstering its security offerings amid surging demand for perimeter protection. The deal closed on December 5, 1995, after which NTI's PIX product line was rebranded under and integrated into its broader networking ecosystem. Prior to the acquisition, NTI had begun shipping early PIX units in 1994, but the -branded version marked the formal commercial launch as a Cisco product. The initial Cisco PIX release in late 1995 introduced models like the PIX 500 series, which featured proprietary adaptive security algorithms for stateful inspection—tracking connection states to permit return traffic dynamically without explicit inbound rules—and supported up to 64 MB of for handling modest throughput of around 100,000 connections per second in base configurations. This distinguished it from competitors by prioritizing performance and security over general-purpose routing, quickly gaining adoption in enterprise environments facing early cyber threats and address exhaustion.

Evolution and Key Milestones

The Cisco PIX firewall traces its origins to Network Translation, Inc. (NTI), established in early 1994 by John Mayes and Brantley Coile to solve conflicts arising from corporate connections. The initial prototype, built on 486 processors with custom single-threaded software lacking a traditional operating system, was completed by late 1994, followed by beta testing at KLA Instruments in November 1994. Commercial shipments of the Network Translation PIX Firewall commenced in early 1995, introducing stateful packet inspection, access control lists, and as core features for securing private networks. Cisco Systems announced its acquisition of NTI on , , with the deal completed on , , for an undisclosed amount, thereby incorporating the PIX codebase into 's ecosystem. Post-acquisition, the product was rebranded as the PIX Firewall, evolving from a standalone appliance into an integrated security solution compatible with 's broader networking infrastructure, including early load balancers like LocalDirector. This period saw enhancements such as stack integration and initial VPN capabilities by late , solidifying PIX as 's first dedicated appliance. The PIX platform expanded through the late 1990s and early 2000s with hardware iterations, including the PIX 515 model released in 1999, which supported higher throughput via modular interfaces. Software evolution progressed through PIX OS versions, culminating in releases like version 8.0 that improved scalability, mechanisms, and integration with emerging protocols, while maintaining the Adaptive Security for policy enforcement. By 2005, shifted focus to the Adaptive Security Appliance () as PIX's successor, retaining the PIX OS kernel (rebranded as ) but adding Linux-based modularity and unified threat management features. On January 28, 2008, announced end-of-sale for all PIX hardware, software, and accessories, with full end-of-support following in subsequent years, marking the conclusion of its primary development lifecycle.

Technical Architecture

Software Features and Operations

The Cisco PIX firewall operated using PIX OS, a proprietary embedded operating system stored in (ROM), which provided a (CLI) similar to for configuration and management, supporting configuration files up to 350 KB in size. This OS handled all firewall functions without reliance on external host systems, enabling self-contained operation focused on security rather than general-purpose routing. At the core of PIX OS functionality was the Adaptive Security Algorithm (ASA), which implemented stateful packet inspection by maintaining connection state tables for all traffic passing through the device. ASA permitted outbound connections from higher-security interfaces (e.g., internal networks at security level 100) to lower-security ones (e.g., external at level 0) by default, while denying inbound connections unless explicitly allowed via conduits or static translations; it tracked TCP sequence numbers, randomized them for added security, and filtered ICMP message types (0, 3, 4, 8, 11, 12, 17, 18) to prevent reconnaissance or attacks. For UDP and multimedia protocols like RealAudio or H.323, ASA created embryonic states based on initial packets, ensuring return traffic matched existing sessions without full proxying. Network Address Translation (NAT) and Port Address Translation (PAT) were integral operations, dynamically mapping private 1918 internal addresses to globally routable public ones for outbound traffic, with PAT enabling up to 64,000 simultaneous connections using a single global . Static allowed fixed mappings for inbound services, such as SMTP servers, while access control relied on conduits (for permitting inbound to specific hosts) and access lists for granular filtering, overriding default level behaviors when applied. Additional software features included cut-through proxies for user authentication via servers before forwarding traffic, Mail Guard for securing SMTP sessions by enforcing compliance and preventing buffer overflows, Flood Defender against SYN floods, and filtering of /Java content. PIX OS supported limited routing via on interfaces and integrated VPN capabilities for site-to-site or remote access tunnels, with options for using active/standby configurations. Connection limits varied by license (e.g., 64, 1,024, or 16,384 simultaneous TCP connections), and SNMP was available in read-only mode for monitoring, concealing internal topology from external queries. These operations prioritized cut-through forwarding—inspecting only initial packets for state creation and passing subsequent ones at wire speed—over deep application-layer proxying, optimizing performance while enforcing policies.

Hardware Platforms and Models

The Cisco PIX firewall series utilized dedicated hardware appliances scaled for small to large enterprise deployments, featuring processors from and , configurable , and varying numbers of network interfaces. Early platforms like the PIX 520 supported modular expansions with multiple interface cards for Ethernet and other , achieving throughputs up to several hundred Mbps in configured setups. Later 500-series models standardized on rack-mountable or desktop form factors, with higher-end units offering expansion slots for up to eight interfaces, including options for , , and VPN accelerators.
ModelProcessorMax RAMMax InterfacesKey Features
PIX 501133 MHz SC52016 MB2 fixed (1x 10/100 outside, 4-port 10/100 hub inside)Entry-level for ; 60 Mbps throughput, 3 Mbps 3DES VPN.
PIX 506E300 MHz 32 MB2 fixed 10/100 EthernetBranch office appliance; introduced in 2002 with enhanced Ethernet support.
PIX 515E443 MHz 128 MB6 (2 fixed + 4 slots)Mid-range; modular interfaces for enterprise edge; "E" variant released 2002.
PIX 525600 MHz 512 MB8 slotsHigh-performance for medium enterprises; supported up to 256 MB RAM in some configs.
PIX 535600 MHz 1 GB8 slotsTop-tier; optional integrated VPN accelerators for 440 Mbps 3DES/ throughput.
Higher models such as the PIX 515, 525, and employed with hot-swappable power supplies and interface modules, enabling configurations via redundant units. The "E" designations for models like 506E and 515E denoted upgrades from original versions, incorporating faster CPUs and native 10/100 Mbps Ethernet without requiring additional cards, announced in February 2002. All platforms ran the PIX OS, with hardware limitations dictating maximum concurrent connections and , often augmented by external accelerators in setups.

Core Capabilities

Security Mechanisms

The Cisco PIX firewall's primary security mechanism was the Adaptive Security Algorithm (ASA), a stateful inspection engine that maintained dynamic connection state tables to track active sessions and permit only response traffic matching established outbound connections from higher-security interfaces. This approach provided robust protection against unauthorized inbound access, including IP spoofing and , by enforcing connection-oriented policies without relying on traditional access lists for basic filtering. ASA operated at wire speed, using cut-through forwarding to minimize latency while ensuring packets were validated against state information before transmission. PIX interfaces were assigned security levels from 0 (least secure, typically outside) to 100 (most secure, typically inside), enabling default implicit rules that permitted traffic from higher to lower levels while denying lower-to-higher flows unless explicitly otherwise. This zoning model simplified policy enforcement by assuming trust gradients between interfaces, reducing complexity compared to fully explicit rule sets; for instance, the inside interface at level 100 allowed outbound access to the outside at level 0 without additional permits. Violations triggered logging and denial, with thresholds for alerts via , SNMP, or paging. Network Address Translation (NAT) and Port Address Translation (PAT) integrated seamlessly with ASA to obscure internal , translating private addresses to public ones for outbound traffic and mapping multiple internals to a single external address via PAT. These mechanisms not only conserved addresses but also enhanced by preventing direct exposure of internal hosts, as return traffic required valid state table entries. Static NAT supported fixed mappings for servers requiring inbound access, combined with security level permits or ACLs. For granular control, particularly overriding default security level behaviors, PIX supported extended Access Control Lists (ACLs) applied inbound on interfaces, filtering based on source/destination IP, ports, and protocols. ACLs were essential for allowing selective lower-to-higher traffic, such as DMZ-to-inside, and integrated with ASA for stateful enforcement. Application-layer inspections, via "fixup" commands, handled protocols like FTP, SMTP (including Mail Guard to block email exploits), HTTP, and DNS by dynamically opening pinholes for secondary channels and validating commands against attack signatures. Cut-through proxy authentication further secured access by prompting users for credentials mid-session, authenticating against AAA servers without proxy overhead. These features collectively delivered layered defense, though ACLs were not mandatory in early versions, relying instead on ASA and levels for core protection.

Performance and Networking Functions

The Cisco PIX firewalls achieved performance levels that scaled with models, emphasizing high throughput and handling for environments. The PIX 515 model delivered up to 170 Mbps of throughput, supporting over 100,000 concurrent connections and handling multiple T3 lines when fully configured. The PIX 501, targeted at small offices, provided 60 Mbps of throughput alongside 3 Mbps of 3DES VPN throughput. Higher-end models like the PIX 525 supported modular interfaces, including up to fourteen 10/100 or nine ports, with performance exceeding 250,000 simultaneous connections and over 6,500 connections per second in optimized configurations. These metrics derived from the PIX's adaptive and cut-through processing, which forwarded packets after initial rather than fully proxying them, yielding faster speeds than competing proxy-based . Networking functions integrated core and services without compromising enforcement. PIX implemented stateful packet to track states across interfaces, enabling dynamic reconfiguration of / networks while applying rules. (NAT) allowed private internal addresses to access external networks via public IPs, with configurable static, dynamic, and PAT modes to visibility and access. VPN capabilities supported site-to-site and remote access tunnels using , with via the VPN Accelerator Card (VAC) enabling up to 2,000 tunnels and 100 Mbps of 168-bit 3DES throughput. High availability features included stateful , where a secondary unit monitored the primary via dedicated links for health, power status, and hello packets, assuming upon detection to minimize downtime. Later software versions, such as 6.3(4), added trunking support for segmenting on Ethernet , enhancing scalability in multi- environments. These functions operated across a range of , from to Gigabit, prioritizing causal packet flow analysis over deep content inspection for efficiency.

Transition to Adaptive Security Appliance

Development of ASA as Successor

The Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance () was developed as an evolutionary successor to the PIX firewall series, leveraging the proprietary operating system rooted in the Cisco OS that powered earlier PIX models. This foundation preserved key PIX innovations, such as stateful packet inspection and the adaptive security algorithm for dynamic threat mitigation, while expanding the platform's scope beyond pure firewalling. Released in 2005, the consolidated functionalities from multiple Cisco product lines into a unified hardware and , allowing it to supplant not only the PIX but also the VPN 3000 Series concentrators for remote access and site-to-site VPN termination, as well as the 4200 Series for inline intrusion prevention. This integration stemmed from enterprise demands for streamlined security appliances that reduced hardware footprint, cabling complexity, and operational overhead without sacrificing performance, as evidenced by the 's support for up to 1 Gbps throughput in initial models like the ASA 5500 Series. Cisco facilitated the transition through backward compatibility in configuration syntax and migration tools, enabling PIX users to upgrade with minimal reconfiguration; for instance, PIX 7.x command sets were largely retained in early ASA versions. The phase-out of PIX culminated in the end-of-sale announcement for all models on July 28, 2008, with support ending on July 29, 2013, redirecting customers fully to ASA for ongoing feature development and security updates.

Key Differences and Improvements

The series, introduced in 2005 as the successor to the PIX firewalls, extended the core stateful packet inspection architecture while incorporating unified security functions beyond pure firewalling. Unlike the PIX, which focused primarily on dedicated hardware-based packet filtering and enforcement, the ASA integrated VPN termination, (IPS) modules, and anti-malware capabilities, enabling it to serve as a multifunctional security appliance. This evolution addressed limitations in PIX's narrower feature set, such as the absence of native WebVPN support for clientless remote access, which ASA provided to reduce dependency on full VPN clients. A primary architectural improvement in ASA was the introduction of multiple security contexts, allowing a single physical device to be partitioned into up to dozens of firewalls with independent configurations, enhancing for multi-tenant environments—a capability not available in PIX. The Modular Policy Framework (MPF) in ASA enabled flexible, class-based policy application for and , contrasting with PIX's more rigid interface-bound access lists and conduit commands. ASA also supported both routed (Layer 3) and (Layer 2) modes natively, improving deployment flexibility over PIX's predominant routed operation, though later PIX versions added limited . These software advancements, built on an evolved OS lineage from PIX version 7.0 to ASA 7.0 and beyond, facilitated better traffic classification and enforcement without requiring explicit in all scenarios, though static routes and access rules remained essential. Performance enhancements in ASA hardware platforms included higher base memory (64 MB versus PIX's typical 16 MB in entry models) and increased throughput, supporting gigabit interfaces and modular expansions for or content engines that PIX lacked. Management transitioned to the Adaptive Security Device Manager (ASDM), a Java-based offering superior and troubleshooting compared to the PIX Device Manager (PDM). These differences culminated in Cisco's 2008 end-of-sale announcement for PIX, positioning ASA as the scalable platform for evolving threats, with backward compatibility tools like the PIX-to-ASA converter aiding migrations.

Security Vulnerabilities

Identified Issues and Exploits

One notable early in Cisco PIX s versions 4.x and 5.x involved SMTP filtering evasion, where attackers could bypass restrictions on commands like EXPN and VRFY by sending the "DATA" command prematurely in an SMTP session, tricking the firewall into treating subsequent commands as message body until a specific termination sequence. This allowed unauthorized of user accounts or other sensitive SMTP interactions without triggering filters, as reported in September 2000. In 1999, the PIX Firewall Manager software was susceptible to a directory traversal vulnerability (CVE-1999-0158), enabling remote attackers to bypass protection and potentially retrieve the enable or other s by manipulating file paths in requests. A in PIX versions 5.2.x through 6.2.1 (CVE-2002-2140) permitted remote attackers to cause a denial-of-service by sending crafted packets, potentially crashing and disrupting network traffic; while primarily leading to reloads, the raised concerns for possible execution under certain conditions. Similarly, authentication-related flaws, such as in version 5.1.4 with + integration (CVE-2001-0375), allowed remote denial-of-service by overwhelming the during attempts to external servers. Cisco's December 2003 advisory disclosed multiple issues (CVEs-2003-1001, -1002, -1003), including SNMPv3 processing flaws that could lead to crashes or unauthorized access in affected PIX versions, though specific exploitation details were limited to denial-of-service impacts. Later advisories in 2007 highlighted crafted packet vulnerabilities in PIX 500 series, enabling denial-of-service through memory corruption or connection blocking via spoofed traffic in versions up to 7.2.x. The 2016 Shadow Brokers leak exposed NSA-developed exploits like BENIGNCERTAIN, targeting legacy PIX firewalls (primarily pre-7.0 versions), which exploited implementation flaws to achieve remote code execution or extract private keys from VPN sessions, akin to a limited Heartbleed-style information disclosure; confirmed the validity and recommended immediate upgrades or isolation of unpatched devices. These exploits, active in wild per some analyses, underscored persistent risks in end-of-support PIX hardware, with no patches available post-2010 end-of-sale.

Cisco Responses and Mitigations

Cisco's Product Security Incident Response Team (PSIRT) addressed vulnerabilities in the PIX firewall through formal security advisories that specified affected software versions, exploitation risks, and remediation steps. These advisories, such as cisco-sa-20021120-pix-vulnerability published on November 20, 2002, recommended upgrading to fixed software releases containing patches for the identified issues. In response to specific defects, released maintenance updates to the PIX operating system. For instance, the December 15, 2003 advisory cisco-sa-20031215-pix documented vulnerabilities including SNMPv3 issues (bug ID CSCeb20276) and provided software fixes to resolve them. Similarly, the February 14, 2007 advisory on multiple PIX vulnerabilities urged upgrades to versions incorporating enhancements. Where immediate patches were unavailable, Cisco prescribed configuration-based workarounds. Addressing a 2005 TCP SYN packet vulnerability (bugs CSCsc14915 for PIX 6.3 and CSCsc16014 for PIX 7.0), which blocked legitimate connections due to unverified checksums, Cisco recommended enabling intercept with minimal embryonic limits, adjusting connection timeouts, verifying checksums, and using commands like clear xlate or clear local-host to restore functionality pending software resolution. For vulnerabilities spanning PIX and its successor , such as crafted packet flaws in the October 17, 2007 advisory, Cisco directed users to apply fixed releases or disable affected protocols as interim measures. These responses emphasized proactive patching during PIX's support lifecycle, with migration to supported platforms advised post-end-of-life to ensure ongoing .

Legacy and Impact

Innovations and Achievements

The Cisco PIX firewall pioneered the , a mechanism that maintained to dynamically permit return traffic while enforcing inbound access controls, marking a shift from static packet filtering to more context-aware security. This innovation enabled robust defense against unauthorized access by tracking , , and other protocol states without relying on application-layer proxies, which were slower and more resource-intensive. A key performance enhancement was the Cut-Through Proxy feature, which authenticated users at the initial connection and then accelerated subsequent packet processing by bypassing full analysis, achieving significantly higher throughput compared to contemporary proxy-based firewalls. Introduced as Cisco's first dedicated hardware firewall in 1994 following the acquisition of Network Translation, Inc., the PIX supported early (NAT) implementation in hardware, facilitating secure connectivity for private networks during the nascent stages of widespread IP adoption. Models like the PIX 515 delivered up to 125,000 simultaneous connections and 120 Mbps throughput, setting benchmarks for enterprise-grade appliances. The PIX series achieved widespread enterprise deployment due to its reliability, high throughput, and integrated VPN capabilities, establishing as a leader in dedicated hardware and influencing subsequent architectures. Its longevity, spanning over a decade of service before the 2005 transition to successors, underscored its role in securing amid growing threats.

Criticisms and Limitations

The Cisco PIX firewalls, while innovative for their era, faced significant limitations in scalability and management due to their hardware-centric design and proprietary Adaptive Security Algorithm (ASA) operating system. Configuration often required extensive manual commands, such as numerous "conduit" statements for access control in DMZ environments with multiple servers, leading to cumbersome administration for larger deployments. File size restrictions further constrained usability; for instance, the PIX 501 model was limited to 256 KB configuration files, with recommendations to keep them under 100 KB for compatibility with the PIX Device Manager (PDM). These factors contributed to challenges in maintaining complex policies without risking performance degradation or configuration errors. Performance bottlenecks emerged in high-throughput scenarios, as the PIX struggled with sustained large-scale demands compared to later . Models like the PIX 525 had fixed RAM (e.g., 256 in some configurations), which could lead to exhaustion under heavy loads, necessitating careful monitoring of CPU and utilization. capabilities were restricted to active/standby modes without support for active/active configurations, limiting redundancy options in environments. Additionally, the non-IOS syntax diverged from standard routing commands, imposing a steeper for administrators familiar with routers and switches. As a legacy platform, the PIX series reached end-of-life status, with hardware like the 500 series and software versions retired by , ceasing all support, updates, and patches as of the early 2010s. This obsolescence poses integration challenges with modern networks, including incompatibility with contemporary protocols and the absence of advanced features like or unified threat management found in successors such as the ASA series. Users continuing to deploy PIX devices risk operational vulnerabilities from unpatched systems and limited third-party maintenance options.

Influence on Firewall Technology

The Cisco PIX played a pivotal role in advancing technology by demonstrating the viability of high-performance, hardware-accelerated stateful packet inspection in dedicated appliances, shifting the industry away from slower proxy-based and software-only solutions prevalent in the early . Leveraging custom application-specific integrated circuits (), PIX achieved throughput rates exceeding 100 Mbps on early models like the PIX-520, introduced in 1995, while enforcing the Adaptive Security Algorithm (ASA), which maintained detailed connection state tables to permit only response traffic for established sessions, thereby mitigating risks like IP spoofing and unauthorized inbound access more effectively than stateless packet filters. This stateful approach, which dynamically filtered packets based on context such as sequence numbers and timeouts, became a foundational for modern firewalls, influencing designs that prioritize performance without sacrificing granularity. PIX's innovated by using levels to implicitly allow intra-level traffic while requiring explicit access control lists (ACLs) for cross-level flows, a model that informed subsequent multilayer architectures in environments. PIX's seamless integration of (NAT) and port address translation (PAT) addressed IPv4 exhaustion pragmatically, enabling widespread private addressing behind public IPs and standardizing NAT as an essential feature; by 2000, this capability supported over 1 million deployed units, embedding NAT into global network topologies and delaying broader adoption. The platform's success spurred Cisco's evolution to the Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) line in 2005, which retained PIX's core ASA engine but added unified threat management elements like VPN acceleration and intrusion prevention, consolidating PIX's appliance-centric model into a dominant enterprise standard that competitors, including ASIC-based rivals like Netscreen, emulated to meet demands for scalable, inline security.

References

  1. [1]
    Cisco Secure Firewall History and Terminology - WWT
    Jun 29, 2023 · The PIX OS was a layer 4 firewall, with stateful inspection of return traffic through conduits, it was industry leading at the time. It had ...<|separator|>
  2. [2]
    Introduction [Cisco PIX Firewall Software]
    The PIX Firewall allows secure access to the Internet from within existing private networks and the ability to expand and reconfigure TCP/IP networks without ...
  3. [3]
    Cisco PIX Firewall Series
    Product Overview. Cisco's PIX Firewall series delivers high security and fast performance to corporate networks. The firewalls allow you to thoroughly conceal ...
  4. [4]
    Cisco PIX 500 Series Security Appliances - Retirement Notification
    The Cisco PIX 500 Series Security Appliances has been retired and is no longer supported. End-of-Sale Date: 2008-07-28. End-of-Support Date: 2013-07-29.
  5. [5]
    [PDF] End of Sales Announcement for Cisco PIX Security Appliances
    It is important to note that Cisco will continue to support Cisco PIX customers through July 27, 2013. In addition to providing the same robust firewall and ...
  6. [6]
    Cisco Systems Acquires Network Translation, Inc.
    Oct 27, 1995 · SAN JOSE, Calif., October 27, 1995 - Cisco Systems Inc. today announced anagreement to purchase privately-held Network Translation, ...Missing: date | Show results with:date
  7. [7]
    Cisco Systems Completes Acquisition of Network Translation, Inc.
    Dec 5, 1995 · Theacquisition follows an agreementsigned October 27, 1995, under which Ciscoagreed to acquire all outstanding employee stock options and ...Missing: date | Show results with:date
  8. [8]
    Acquisitions by Year - Cisco
    Network Translation, Inc. - October 27, 1995. In October 1995, Cisco Systems, Inc., agreed to purchase privately held Network Translation, Inc. (NTI), a ...
  9. [9]
    The PIX - Coraid
    Apr 19, 2003 · Late in 1995, John told me that Cisco was sniffing around. In November, the Network Translation PIX Firewall became the Cisco PIX Firewall.
  10. [10]
    Cisco PIX 515E - The Serial Port - serialport.org
    The 515E is an updated model of the original 515 released in 1999. Cisco increased processing power for this updated model, and also included hardware-based VPN ...
  11. [11]
    Cisco PIX Firewall Software - Retirement Notification
    The Cisco PIX Firewall Software has been retired and is no longer supported. You can view a listing of available Firewalls offerings that best meet your ...
  12. [12]
    Introduction [Cisco PIX Firewall Software]
    The PIX (Private Internet Exchange) Firewall, when properly configured, helps prevent unauthorized connections from one network to another. The network that the ...
  13. [13]
    [PDF] Cisco Pix 520 Series Firewall Data Sheet
    Product Overview. Cisco PIX Firewall is the high-performance, enterprise-class integrated hardware/software firewall within Cisco's firewall family.
  14. [14]
    CISCO PIX 500 SERIES FIREWALL Hardware View
    Certain PIX 535 models include integrated hardware VPN acceleration delivering up to 440 Mbps of 3DES VPN throughput and 440 Mbps of AES-256 VPN throughput.
  15. [15]
    PIX Firewall Models - aSupport.com
    It provides two autonegotiate RJ45 10BaseT ports (inside and outside).The 506 supports 8 Mbps cleartext throughput, with 6 Mbps 3DES IPsec and can support ...
  16. [16]
    PIX Hardware | GlobalSpec
    Five models are currently supported: the 501, the 506E, the 515E, the 525, and the 535. However, there are three models that you may see deployed in enterprise ...Missing: platforms | Show results with:platforms
  17. [17]
    Cisco Unveils New PIX Firewalls, Enhanced OS - CRN
    Feb 13, 2002 · Cisco released new versions of its PIX 506 and 515 firewalls with its new "E" series. Designed for small offices, the 506E is a plug-and-play appliance that ...
  18. [18]
  19. [19]
    Cisco PIX Security Appliance Hardware Installation Guide, Version 7.1
    This guide describes how to install the Cisco PIX security appliance hardware components. Audience. This guide is for network administrators who perform any of ...
  20. [20]
    Configuring the PIX Firewall - Cisco
    You can choose any security level between 1 and 99 for a perimeter interface as long as it is not the same as the inside and outside interfaces. If you have ...
  21. [21]
    PIX/ASA 7.x and FWSM: NAT and PAT Statements - Cisco
    Sep 26, 2008 · This document provides examples of basic Network Address Translation (NAT) and Port Address Translation (PAT) configurations on the Cisco PIX/ASA Security ...Introduction · The nat-control Command · Multiple NAT Statements with...
  22. [22]
    NAT and PAT Statement Use on the Cisco Secure ASA Firewall ...
    This document provides examples of basic Network Address Translation (NAT) and Port Address Translation (PAT) configurations on the Cisco Secure PIX Firewall.
  23. [23]
    Configure IP Access Lists - Cisco
    This document describes various types of IP Access Control Lists (ACLs) and how they can filter network traffic.Missing: stateful | Show results with:stateful<|separator|>
  24. [24]
    [PDF] CISCO PIX FIREWALL SERIES - Black Box
    Base models come with two single-port. 10/100 Ethernet NICs. JavaTM based graphical user interface (GUI) simplifies unit configuration and management. Simple, ...
  25. [25]
    What does fixup protocol http actually do on a Cisco PIX firewall?
    Feb 22, 2011 · The PIX/ASA version 7 (and later) code enables you to perform all of the above tasks and adds Enhanced HTTP inspection, as described in ASA 8.4 ...
  26. [26]
    [PDF] The Cisco Secure PIX 515 Firewall - MTMnet
    Designed for mid-sized organizations, the PIX 515 UR provides nearly 170 Mbps of throughput and over 100,000 concurrent connections for fast, reliable, and ...
  27. [27]
    [PDF] Cisco Secure PIX Firewall Series
    The Cisco Secure PIX Firewall series products are available now. The following table lists the Cisco Secure PIX Firewall series ordering information. Table ...<|separator|>
  28. [28]
    [PDF] CISCO PIX 535 SECURITY APPLIANCE
    Its highly modular three-rack unit (3RU) design supports a combination of up to fourteen 10/100 Fast Ethernet interfaces or nine Gigabit Ethernet interfaces as ...
  29. [29]
    Cisco PIX 510 - Firewall - 2 / 6 - 2 ports - Elarasys
    The Cisco Secure PIX Firewalls deliver superior performance of up to 250, 000 simultaneous connections, over 6, 500 connections per second, and nearly 170 ...
  30. [30]
  31. [31]
    Configuration Examples [Cisco PIX Firewall Software]
    The nat command lets users access all hosts on all lower security level interfaces. The global command identifies the interface through which the nat access is ...Missing: stateful inspection ACL
  32. [32]
    Cisco Redefines Performance With New Firewall and VPN Solutions
    Dec 4, 2000 · Supporting as many as 2,000 tunnels and providing 100 Megabits per second (Mbps) of 168-bit 3DES throughput, the VAC makes the PIX firewall an ...Missing: specifications | Show results with:specifications
  33. [33]
    [PDF] Implementing Site-to-Site VPNs using Cisco Secure PIX firewalls
    May 6, 2003 · Along with protecting your network the. PIX firewall can also act as a VPN device that will connect your remote offices to the corporate office.
  34. [34]
    Advanced Configurations [Cisco PIX Firewall Software]
    The failover feature in PIX Firewall monitors failover communication, the power status of the other unit, and hello packets received at each interface.
  35. [35]
    Cisco PIX Firewall Release Notes, Version 6.3(4)
    This release is provides new features and fixes for a variety of PIX Firewall models and configuration modes, including new VLAN support, AAA fallback ...
  36. [36]
    Adaptive Security Appliance FAQ - Cisco
    Jul 1, 2014 · Cisco ASA Software is not forked off Cisco IOS® Software. Its roots are in the Cisco Finesse ® OS (an embedded OS), which ran on older Cisco PIX ...
  37. [37]
    The Evolution of Cisco ASA Firewalls: From Past to Present
    Jun 14, 2024 · This demand led to the development and release of the Cisco ASA series in 2005. The ASA was not merely an iteration of the PIX but a substantial ...
  38. [38]
    Executive summary for replacing PIX with ASA - Cisco Community
    Oct 23, 2009 · ASA could take the place of three separate devices-a Cisco PIX firewall, a Cisco VPN 3000 Series Concentrator, and a Cisco IPS 4000 Series ...To migrate from PIX 515e to ASA 5500-X series - Cisco CommunityReplacing PIX 515 with ASA 5510 - Cisco CommunityMore results from community.cisco.com
  39. [39]
    PIX/ASA and VPN Client for Public Internet VPN on a Stick ... - Cisco
    Sep 26, 2008 · This document describes how to set up a ASA Security Appliance 7.2 and later to perform IPsec on a stick.
  40. [40]
    Cisco PIX vs Cisco ASA: Stateful Firewalls - IP With Ease
    Apr 1, 2025 · Comparison Table: PIX vs ASA. Below table enlists the difference between both the PIX and ASA –. S No. PIX. ASA.
  41. [41]
    The Evolution of Cisco ASA and Its Impact on CCIE Security ...
    Jul 26, 2024 · The Cisco ASA first emerged as a necessary response to increasing security threats in the early 2000s. Initially designed to replace the older ...Missing: key milestones<|separator|>
  42. [42]
    Solved: PIX VS ASA - Cisco Community
    Nov 11, 2013 · The PIX explicitly required NAT, Access rules & routes. Is it the same for ASA when it comes to NAT? Does it require explicit NAT (nat ot no nat)?Difference B/W PIX,ASA & FWSM?PIX vs ASAMore results from community.cisco.comMissing: key | Show results with:key
  43. [43]
    Chapter: Getting Started - Cisco
    Jun 29, 2007 · There are some hardware differences between the PIX and the ASA security appliance. Moreover, the ASA 5505 includes a built-in switch, and ...
  44. [44]
    Cisco PIX Firewall 4.x/5.x - SMTP Content Filtering Evasion
    The exploit involves sending the 'data' command before other SMTP info, tricking the firewall into thinking the message body is being sent, allowing command ...
  45. [45]
    NVD - CVE-2002-2140
    No readable text found in the HTML.<|separator|>
  46. [46]
    CVE-2001-0375 Detail - NVD
    Description. Cisco PIX Firewall 515 and 520 with 5.1.4 OS running aaa authentication to a TACACS+ server allows remote attackers to cause a denial of ...Missing: exploits | Show results with:exploits
  47. [47]
    Cisco PIX Vulnerabilities
    Dec 15, 2003 · This advisory documents two vulnerabilities for the Cisco PIX firewall. These vulnerabilities are documented as CSCeb20276 (SNMPv3) and ...
  48. [48]
    Multiple Vulnerabilities in Cisco PIX and ASA Appliances
    Feb 14, 2007 · Multiple vulnerabilities are found in Cisco PIX 500 Series Security Appliances and the Cisco ASA 5500 Series Adaptive Security Appliances.
  49. [49]
    The Shadow Brokers EPICBANANA and EXTRABACON Exploits
    Aug 17, 2016 · UPDATE April 20, 2017 Cisco continues to evaluate potential implications of the activities and information posted publicly by the Shadow ...
  50. [50]
    Cisco Security Advisories
    This document also contains instructions for obtaining fixed software and receiving security vulnerability information from Cisco.Multiple Cisco Products · Cisco Integrated Management... · Cisco IOS XE Wireless...
  51. [51]
    Cisco PIX Multiple Vulnerabilities
    Nov 20, 2002 · Two vulnerabilities have been resolved for the PIX firewall for which fixes are available. These vulnerabilities are documented as Cisco bug ID ...Missing: responses mitigations
  52. [52]
    Cisco Security Advisory: Cisco PIX Multiple Vulnerabilities
    Nov 20, 2002 · Current thread: Cisco Security Advisory: Cisco PIX Multiple Vulnerabilities Cisco Systems Product Security Incident Response Team (Nov 20) ...
  53. [53]
    [PDF] Response to Cisco PIX TCP Connection Prevention
    Nov 22, 2005 · By sending a TCP SYN packet with an incorrect checksum through a PIX firewall, the PIX will block new. TCP connections using the same source ...
  54. [54]
    Multiple Vulnerabilities in Cisco PIX and ASA Appliance
    Oct 17, 2007 · Two crafted packet vulnerabilities exist in the Cisco PIX 500 Series Security Appliance (PIX) and the Cisco 5500 Series Adaptive Security ...Missing: exploits | Show results with:exploits
  55. [55]
    [PDF] Cisco's PIX Firewall Series and Stateful Firewall Security - ICANN
    Cisco's PIX Firewall series offers the lowest cost of ownership, because it can be configured quickly using an enhanced, Web-based graphical-user interface (GUI) ...
  56. [56]
    Introduction [Cisco PIX Firewall Software]
    PIX Firewall allows secure access to the Internet from within existing private networks and the ability to expand and reconfigure TCP/IP networks without being ...
  57. [57]
    [PDF] The Nobel Foundation: to Inspire Innovation - Cisco
    The Cisco. Secure PIX 515 Firewalls deliver superior performance of up to 125,000 simultaneous connections and nearly 120 megabits per second (Mbps) throughput.
  58. [58]
    [PDF] Cisco Pix Firewall
    Originally introduced in the late 1990s, the PIX firewall was Cisco's first dedicated security appliance. It combines stateful inspection technology with ...Missing: origins | Show results with:origins
  59. [59]
    [PDF] Cisco PIX vs. Checkpoint Firewall
    PIX Cons: 1) Difficult to manage if you have many servers on a protected DMZ (lots and lots of conduit statements) or many firewalls to manage. 2) Routing ...<|separator|>
  60. [60]
    Cisco PIX Firewall Release Notes, Version 6.3(5)
    PIX Firewall Version 6.3 requires Cisco IOS Release 12.0(6)T or higher running on the router when using IKE Mode Configuration on the PIX Firewall. Cisco VPN ...Missing: origins initial
  61. [61]
    PIX 525 Scalability - Cisco Community
    Apr 23, 2006 · Based on this info, do you think might I have any problems related to scalability? Do you think that the built-in RAM which is 256 MB will ...PIX is so difficult - Cisco CommunitySlightly different PIX throughput problem - Cisco CommunityMore results from community.cisco.com
  62. [62]
    What is the difference between a Cisco PIX and a Cisco ASA? - Quora
    Dec 14, 2022 · It was introduced in 2005, the ASA brand superseded Cisco's stand-alone PIX firewalls, IPS, and VPN devices. This is the layer of Cisco ASA and ...
  63. [63]
    What is the difference between a PIX Firewall and a router or switch ...
    The Firewall functions as a filter as traffic moves from one network to another. It blocks or allows specific protocols and data types, and inspects ...Missing: specifications | Show results with:specifications
  64. [64]
    What are the repercussions of using an EOL Cisco firewall?
    Jul 2, 2014 · At this stage of the product life cycle new units are no longer sold, but the product is still supported by Cisco for existing users. You maybe ...
  65. [65]
    Stateful Packet-Filtering and the Cisco PIX Appliance - Network World
    May 14, 2009 · Dynamic packet-filtering firewalls, the fourth generation firewall technology, are also referred to more specifically as “stateful firewalls”.
  66. [66]
    A Practical History of the Firewall - Part 3 - FireMon
    Apr 9, 2024 · Learn how ASICs and firewall appliances revolutionized performance in the early 2000s, making security mainstream and transforming ...Missing: evolution | Show results with:evolution