From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jul 16 20:19:35 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33F7516A4DD;
	Sun, 16 Jul 2006 20:19:35 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from ari@suutari.iki.fi)
Received: from pne-smtpout3-sn1.fre.skanova.net
	(pne-smtpout3-sn1.fre.skanova.net [81.228.11.120])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B058743D45;
	Sun, 16 Jul 2006 20:19:34 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from ari@suutari.iki.fi)
Received: from mato.suutari.iki.fi (80.222.160.17) by
	pne-smtpout3-sn1.fre.skanova.net (7.2.075)
	id 44A1309900097CE9; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 22:19:33 +0200
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (orava.suutari.iki.fi [192.168.60.101])
	by mato.suutari.iki.fi (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k6GKJVC6002258;
	Sun, 16 Jul 2006 23:19:31 +0300 (EEST)
	(envelope-from ari@suutari.iki.fi)
Message-ID: <44BA9ECA.6090607@suutari.iki.fi>
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 23:17:14 +0300
From: Ari Suutari <ari@suutari.iki.fi>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Windows/20060516)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Daniel Hartmeier <daniel@benzedrine.cx>
References: <44B7715E.8050906@suutari.iki.fi>
	<20060714154729.GA8616@psconsult.nl>
	<44B7D8B8.3090403@suutari.iki.fi>
	<20060716182315.GC3240@insomnia.benzedrine.cx>
	<44BA8A95.10300@suutari.iki.fi>
	<20060716191732.GD3240@insomnia.benzedrine.cx>
In-Reply-To: <20060716191732.GD3240@insomnia.benzedrine.cx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0628-5, 14.07.2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org, freebsd-pf@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Any ongoing effort to port /etc/rc.d/pf_boot, /etc/pf.boot.conf
 from NetBSD ?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
	<freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 20:19:35 -0000

Hi,


Daniel Hartmeier wrote:
> You claimed there was a hole. If you can't explain what it consists of
> ("thing X might get exposed prior to rc.d/pf due to the following
> sequence of events..."),


	On FreeBSD 6.1, run rcorder /etc/rc.d/*. You'll notice that
	pf is run after netif so if one is using only pf as firewall,
	there is a window between run of "netif" and "pf" where network
	interfaces are up but there is no firewall loaded. Adding
	pf_boot, which runs before "netif" would fix this, woudn't it ?

	Please correct me if I'm wrong here (that would be nice since
	then there wouldn't be any problem at all).

 > blindly sticking in pf_boot at some convenient
> place in the boot order is not guaranteed to solve more than it can
> break.

	I don't think I have been talking about blindly sticking pf_boot
	into boot order. I would only like to be sure that there *is* no
	hole. I have been suggesting about using pf_boot because it
	seeems to be the approach used in other bsds (well, I must admit
	that I didn't check how OpenBSD does it, but I know that there
	is somekind of boot-time ruleset there). I assumed that since
	the pf_boot solution is there possible problems with it had been
	ironed out on other bsds.

	Even Windows XP has boot-time firewall protection today - we
	don't want to be worse than them, do we :-)


		Ari S.