0

I am trying to better understand measures that can be used to protect a web-application. I'm trying to determine which would be more effective, implementing a UFW or using IpTables.

From my perspective, they are both as effective as each other but the effectiveness of them is not based on the tools themselves but rather the rules implemented using them. That being said, I think the Iptables operate at the Transport layer and the UFW at the network layer.

For a web-app, which one would be more effective/appropriate to use? I think it would the UFW since it operates at the network layer where malicious packets can be dropped before reaching the transport layer but I remain quite unsure.

Would appreciate any insight into using a UFW or Iptables for web-apps.

1

1 Answer 1

2

UFW is just a frontend for iptables to make it easier to manage. If you create your rules with ufw, you'll see them when you run iptables -L -n -v.

iptables gives you more flexibility, but it's also slightly more complicated to configure - so use whichever one you're most happy with. If you use iptables, remember that it only affects IPv4 - you need to also use ip6tables if your server has IPv6.

2
  • Ahh thanks so much for this explanation. While iptables is more flexible, the complexity might make it more difficult for a popular web-app to introduce new rules to better protect so a ufw would be more desirable?
    – Krellex
    Mar 31, 2022 at 18:33
  • If you're just going to do something like allow inbound 80 and 443 it really doesn't make any difference. If you need a more complicated setup you might struggle to do it with UFW - but it really depends on what you're trying to do.
    – Gh0stFish
    Mar 31, 2022 at 19:10

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .