Hi Splunkers, I have some doubt about SSL use for S2S communication. First, let us remark what is sure, with no doubts: 1. SSL provide a compression ratio better than default one: 1:8 vs 1:2. 2. S...
See more...
Hi Splunkers, I have some doubt about SSL use for S2S communication. First, let us remark what is sure, with no doubts: 1. SSL provide a compression ratio better than default one: 1:8 vs 1:2. 2. SSL Compression does NOT affect license. In general, ALL Compression on Splunk does not affect license. This means that: if before compression data has dimension X + Y and, after it, X, consumed license will be X + Y, not X. 3. From a security perspective, if I have multiple Splunk components, the best way to configure flows should be encrypt all of them. For example if I have UF -> HF -> IDX, for security purpose the best is to encrypt both UF -> HF flow and HF -> IDX one. Now, for a customer we have the following data flow: Log sources -> Intermediate Forwarder -> Heavy forwarders -> Indexers I know that when possible we should avoid HF and IF but, for different reason, we need them on this particular environment. Here, 2 doubt rise: Suppose we apply SSL only between IF and HF. 1. Data arrive compressed on HF. When they leaves it and goes to IDXs, they are still compressed? So, for example suppose we have original data with a total dimension of 800 MB: Between IF and HF exist SSL, so in HF there is a tcp-ssl input on port 9997 SSL compression is applied: now data have 100 MB dimension When they arrive to HF, they have 100 MB dimension When they leave the HF to go on IDXs, they still have 100 MB dimension? Suppose now we apply SSL on entire S2S data flow: between IF and HF and between HF and IDXs. In addition to a better security posture, which other advantage we should achieve going in this direction?