RE: [Full-Disclosure] A new TCP/IP blind data injection technique ?

John.Airey_at_rnib.org.uk
Date: 12/16/03

  • Next message: Christopher Parker: "Re: [Full-Disclosure] A funny (but real) story for XMAS"
    To: michael@bluesuperman.com, lcamtuf@ghettot.org
    Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 10:16:05 -0000
    
    

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Michael Gale [mailto:michael@bluesuperman.com]
    > Sent: 15 December 2003 18:47
    > To: Michal Zalewski
    > Cc: full-disclosure@lists.netsys.com
    > Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] A new TCP/IP blind data injection
    > technique?
    >
    >
    > Hello,
    >
    > I misunderstood ... from my knowledge the BorderWare
    > Firewall drops all
    > fragmented packets and there is NO option to change this.
    >
    > You can change the MTU size on the interfaces which should
    > allow you to
    > correct any problems.
    >
    > I am not sure about Cisco Pix :(
    >
    > I have never found a problem with any services running behind the
    > firewall or connecting to any services out side the firewall with the
    > settings to drop all fragmented packets.
    >
    > Now according to your injection vulnerability even if a firewall
    > recreated all the packets before sending it to the end client the
    > vulnerability could still occur unless the firewall did some
    > strong form
    > of application level filtering and then some how found out that one
    > piece of data did not belong.
    >
    > So with all this said how is it unwise not to drop fragmented packets
    > and not necessary ?
    >
    > Michael.
    >
    >
    The Cisco Pix has an IP fragment database.

    According to Cisco Documentation "The fragment command provides additional
    management of packet fragmentation and improves compatibility with NFS."

    The command "show fragment" gives output like this:

    Interface: outside
        Size: 200, Chain: 24, Timeout: 5
        Queue: 0, Assemble: 0, Fail: 0, Overflow: 0
    Interface: inside
        Size: 200, Chain: 24, Timeout: 5
        Queue: 0, Assemble: 0, Fail: 0, Overflow: 0

    Dropping fragments is only a bad idea if you also drop all ICMP packets. The
    bare minimum is to allow in "echo-reply", "source-quench", "unreachable" and
    "time-exceeded", although you could probably survive without the first one
    if you don't mind being unable to check connectivity using ping.

    Basically, receiving fragments may be a sign that your MTU setting is too
    small. The ICMP packets that you would also receive in this instance can be
    used by the TCP/IP stacks to adjust the packet size at each end. Having
    never been able to use NFS across a Pix Firewall, I have no idea how these
    settings help with NFS.

    -
    John Airey, BSc (Jt Hons), CNA, RHCE
    Internet systems support officer, ITCSD, Royal National Institute of the
    Blind,
    Bakewell Road, Peterborough PE2 6XU,
    Tel.: +44 (0) 1733 375299 Fax: +44 (0) 1733 370848 John.Airey@rnib.org.uk

    There is more historical evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ than for
    either Henry VIII or Julius Caesar.

    -
    DISCLAIMER:

    NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is
    confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended
    recipient you should not use, disclose, distribute or copy any of the
    content of it or of any attachment; you are requested to notify the
    sender immediately of your receipt of the email and then to delete it
    and any attachments from your system.

    RNIB endeavours to ensure that emails and any attachments generated by
    its staff are free from viruses or other contaminants. However, it
    cannot accept any responsibility for any such which are transmitted.
    We therefore recommend you scan all attachments.

    Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email and
    any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily represent
    those of RNIB.

    RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227

    Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk

    _______________________________________________
    Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
    Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


  • Next message: Christopher Parker: "Re: [Full-Disclosure] A funny (but real) story for XMAS"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Kerio 2.1.5 vulnerability
      ... > |> So it seems any packet with the fragment bit set goes straight through ... > |> the firewall, and kerio only logs plain SYN packets. ... Nice one Kerio. ...
      (comp.security.firewalls)
    • Re: Kerio 2.1.5 vulnerability
      ... >> So it seems any packet with the fragment bit set goes straight through ... >> the firewall, and kerio only logs plain SYN packets. ... Nice one Kerio. ...
      (comp.security.firewalls)
    • Re: Kerio 2.1.5 vulnerability
      ... |> So it seems any packet with the fragment bit set goes straight through ... |> the firewall, and kerio only logs plain SYN packets. ... Nice one Kerio. ...
      (comp.security.firewalls)
    • Re: iptables and dhcp
      ... > the same physical network segment as the firewall and the remote DHCP ... You used INPUT and not FORWARD chain ... # This target allows packets to be marked in the mangle table ...
      (comp.os.linux.networking)
    • Re: Trouble accessing Outlook Web Access from behind firewall
      ... When starting the firewall I also set ... > rejected and dropped packets are logged, however I see nothing in my log ... > # Higher ports needed to accept incoming/outgoing calls ...
      (comp.security.firewalls)