Firewall & Edge Security
How the perimeter firewall is deployed, what inspection it applies to traffic crossing the boundary, and how remote access and edge services are controlled.
Capture progress
10 of 10 fields captured
Maturity preview · Developing

Firewall platform & deployment

Every perimeter firewall in production, by vendor. Multi-vendor postures are common — record each. Empty selection is a hard finding (a documented perimeter firewall is the bedrock of CIPA compliance — see NET-CF F2 for the enforcement-point pairing).

HA posture for the perimeter. A single firewall with no failover is a hard finding — outage equals full instructional-day internet loss, including state-mandated testing windows. Active/Passive is the standard floor; Active/Active and ZTNA-fronted designs are the upper tiers.

Distinct from which inspection features are enabled (see F6) — this asks whether the hardware/license can support what's enabled (and more) without performance impact. “Over capacity — features disabled” is a hard finding: the firewall isn't enforcing what it's licensed for.

How traffic between district sites is carried. No hard finding here — each option is a defensible architecture; the field surfaces the design choice for context. SD-WAN overlays are the modern default; private transport (MPLS) is common for districts with long-running ISP contracts.

Rule base & traffic inspection

How often the firewall rule base is reviewed for relevance, scope, and orphan rules, and when the last review ran. Stale rules accumulate — orphaned permit rules outlive the systems they protected, and scope drift turns specific allows into effective any-any. “Ad-hoc only” and “Never reviewed” are hard findings. Continuous (tool-driven) postures use rule-analyzer pipelines in lieu of scheduled reviews.

Current · 14 mo ago

Combined IPS + TLS decryption maturity. Endpoint-based filtering (see NET-CF F1) can partially compensate when edge TLS decryption is limited — the upper tiers here are still the target for districts not relying primarily on endpoint inspection. “No deep inspection” reduces the firewall to Layer 4 stateful only and is a hard finding.

What outbound traffic is filtered, beyond the default-allow stateful response that comes free with any firewall. DNS-layer egress (cross-ref NET-IPS F10 — forwarder choice) handles part of this; Layer 4/7 egress at the firewall handles the rest. Default-permit outbound (“No egress filtering”) is a hard finding — C2 callbacks, exfiltration, and credential harvesting all rely on outbound paths.

Remote access & edge services

How privileged remote access is established. MFA on client VPN is the minimum bar now — IPsec/L2TP without MFA is a hard finding. ZTNA (per-application, identity-driven) is the modern replacement for client VPN; many districts run a mixed posture during transition. See legacy-cyber IAM for the auth-posture side of this question (when that sub-domain comes online).

Additional ingress hardening applied on top of default-deny — geo-blocking on published services (VPN concentrator, optional school-website) and threat-intel reputation feeds. No hard finding here; default-deny + NAT genuinely is a defensible baseline for districts publishing few services. The ladder surfaces the maturity choice.

How volumetric attacks are mitigated. Many K-12 districts rely on ISP-level upstream scrubbing alone (typical via regional service-center networks in Texas), which is acceptable given their published-service footprint. No hard finding — each option is defensible at the right scale.

Notes