A Presentation on VPN Replacement

This presentation discusses the replacement of legacy VPNs with advanced IPsec and SSL based VPNs. It explores the drawbacks of traditional VPNs and highlights the advantages of alternatives like Microsoft DirectAccess and multi-protocol VPNs. The future scope of SSL VPNs and the role of IPsec VPNs are also discussed.

“
”
A Presentation on VPN
Replacement
VPN Replacement Technologies
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

Introduction
 Legacy VPNs like Cisco Systems VPN client, the CITES Nortel VPN and
Aventail SSL VPN used to be industry leading VPNs and got discontinued in
2014.
 The two key protocols based on which typical VPNs are available are IPsec
and SSL. Recent IPsec VPNs use dynamic multipoint and MPLS features.
 Legacy VPNs were client based VPNs and used IPsec protocol
 VPNs based on SSL use web browsers and separate clients are not required.
 Other alternatives include multi-protocol VPNs like SoftEther and Cisco
AnyConnect.
 Microsoft DirectAccess is a completely different alternative.

Replacing Traditional VPNs
 The VPN market used to be dominated by
legacy VPNs like Cisco Systems VPN client,
the CITES Nortel VPN and Aventail SSL VPN.
 With the release of more advanced network
based IPsec and SSL VPNs, the legacy
solutions lost their value and got
discontinued in 2014.
 Even the recent IPsec and SSL based VPNs
have their share of drawbacks.
 In IPsec outbound connections often get
blocked by firewalls [1].
 These drawbacks can be addressed by
Microsoft DirectAccess and multi-protocol
VPNs like Cisco AnyConnect and SoftEther
VPN program.

Advantages of Alternatives
 The alternate VPNs like DirectAccess
and SoftEther consume less system
resources.
 These VPNs can be easy to setup and
configure just like SSL and yet
provides better security.
 A range of additional features is
provided by these VPNs like working
in conjunction with Active Directory or
even cloning of other VPN solutions.
 SoftEther can provide cross platform
support and BYOD or Bring Your Own
Device functionality.

Future Scope
 SSL VPNs are easy to use and the
user only requires to enter the
credentials [2].
 Thus it will continue to gain wide
scale adoption.
 More serious users on network
security require more effective
VPNs.
 These role can be filled by Direct
Access, AnyConnect and SoftEther.
 There is no role for VPNs that only
use IPsec protocol.

Conclusion
 The presentation concludes that though legacy VPNs got replaced by
advanced IPsec based and SSL based VPNs, they are still not foolproof.
 In IPsec VPNs outbound connections are not always allowed because of
custom ports.
 SSL based VPNs can be exploited by a range of vulnerabilities.
 Hence alternatives like DirectAccess and multi-protocol VPNs are being
suggested.
 VPNs solely based on IPsec have no significant role in the future.

References
 [1] F.A. Salman, Implementation of IPsec-VPN tunneling using GNS3.
Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 7(3),
pp.855-860., 2017.
 [2] M. Zhang, Study on Remote Access for Library Based on SSL VPN.
International Journal of Control and Automation, 9(1), pp.111-122.,
2016.