This paper compares and contrasts TSL/SSL and IPSec over VPN in a very specific market and technical analysis.

Written in 2008; 12,370 words; 17 sources; APA; $ 238.95

The intent of this paper is to concentrate on comparing and contrasting SSL versus IPSec from both a market factors-based and technology-based comparisons. The Open Systems Interconnect (OSI) Model is a valuable construct for analyzing each of these specific security protocols in the context of network connectivity and systems integration. A market-based analysis of how each of these protocols precedes the technical analysis to specifically show how the protocols are evolving based on customers' needs, with SSL-based VPNs being seen by many organizations as being more cost-effective and easier to deploy that the more complex, yet more secure, IPSec-based VPNs. The core view of this paper is that all types of remote connectivity is critical for ensuring enterprise productivity.

Outline:
Executive Summary
Using the OSI Model as a Framework for Comparison
Using the TCP/IP Model as a Frame of Reference
Defining Virtual Private Networks and their role in security
VPN Tunneling: Implications for Security
Options for Creating Secured Virtual Private Networks
Defining IPSec-based VPNs
Defining SSL-based VPNs
Technical Comparative Analysis of IPSEC vs. SSL-based VPN
Market Comparative Analysis of IPSec vs. SSL-based VPN
Evaluating the Cost of IPSec versus SSL VPNs
Summary

"The method that VPNs use for communicating between both systems and networks is a method calling tunneling. The foundation of this method is to use an internetwork infrastructure to transfer data from one network to another. The data being transferred is organized into frames or packets, and relies on a specific preamble or Transit Internetwork Header. Protocols relying on tunneling complete an entire series of steps to create data packets, encode them for security, and then attach preamble and postamble headers and footers to the message for use by the receiving system or network to first accept the packets as secure and authentic, and second, transmit them to the intended destination. What the tunneling protocol does in addition to the specific security protocol selected by the designer of the network is to first encapsulate the frame into a record header. The additional header provides routing information so that the encapsulated payload can traverse the intermediate internetwork. The function of the Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) protocol is to primarily provide high levels of packet flow confidentiality, and limited traffic flow confidentiality (Kent 6-7)
The encapsulated packets are then routed between tunnel endpoints over the internetwork. The logical path through which the encapsulated packets travel through the internetwork's defined tunnels. Once the encapsulated frames reach their destination on the internetwork, the frame is unencapsulated and forwarded to its final destination. Tunneling includes this entire process (encapsulation, transmission, and unencapsulation of packets) and is graphically illustrated defined in Figure 6."

Tags: systems, networks, methodology, telecommunication, internet, technology

1. Analytical Essay # 112762 :: The Advantages of IPv6 in VPNs ( 3,090 words; 20 sources; )
2. Essay (General) # 36517 :: Comparative Advantage ( 1,900 words; 8 sources; )
3. Comparison Essay # 36910 :: Comparative Work in Social Policy ( 1,900 words; 8 sources; )
4. Business Plan # 69396 :: Comparative Analysis for Curves ( 4,600 words; 17 sources; )