Re: Fw: Re: A question about FreeBSD security
From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav (des@ofug.org)
Date: 07/19/01
- Next message: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group: "Re: [PATCH] Re: FreeBSD remote root exploit ?"
- Previous message: Richard Lucas: "Re: [PATCH] Re: FreeBSD remote root exploit ?"
- In reply to: Ralph Huntington: "Re: Fw: Re: A question about FreeBSD security"
- Next in thread: Sean Chittenden: "Possible limitations of ipfw dynamic rules/state (was: Re: Fw: Re: A question about FreeBSD security)"
- Reply: Sean Chittenden: "Possible limitations of ipfw dynamic rules/state (was: Re: Fw: Re: A question about FreeBSD security)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
To: Ralph Huntington <rjh@mohawk.net> From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> Date: 19 Jul 2001 23:00:06 +0200
Ralph Huntington <rjh@mohawk.net> writes:
> My understanding (someone please correct me if I am wrong) is that IPFW
> relies on the incoming packets' own headers to infer the established
> state, whereas IPF keeps a table of outgoing packets (when told to keep
> state) and matches incoming packets to the entries in the table to
> determine if they are actually in response to an outgoing packet.
Both. It all depends on how you set up your rule set - you can do
# ipfw add pass tcp from any to me 22 in setup
# ipfw add pass tcp from me 22 to any out tcpflags syn,ack keep-state
instead of
# ipfw add pass tcp from any to me 22 in setup keep-state
The first variant will only store state for incoming connections to
which you actually respond, while the second will store state for all
incoming connections.
DES
-- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
- Next message: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group: "Re: [PATCH] Re: FreeBSD remote root exploit ?"
- Previous message: Richard Lucas: "Re: [PATCH] Re: FreeBSD remote root exploit ?"
- In reply to: Ralph Huntington: "Re: Fw: Re: A question about FreeBSD security"
- Next in thread: Sean Chittenden: "Possible limitations of ipfw dynamic rules/state (was: Re: Fw: Re: A question about FreeBSD security)"
- Reply: Sean Chittenden: "Possible limitations of ipfw dynamic rules/state (was: Re: Fw: Re: A question about FreeBSD security)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|