Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 10 Feb 2003 15:16:19 -0500 (EST)
From:      Andriy Gapon <agapon@cv-nj.com>
To:        "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-security@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: ipsec & ipfw: 4.7-release vs -stable
Message-ID:  <20030210150116.R53750@edge.foundation.invalid>
In-Reply-To: <20030210192207.GC5292@opus.celabo.org>
References:  <20030210114213.P53494@edge.foundation.invalid> <20030210192207.GC5292@opus.celabo.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 10 Feb 2003, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:

> What is the problem you are having, exactly?  What is the `potential
> security vulnaribity'?

Jacques,

maybe this is not a 'security vulnaribity' per se,
there were several lengthy discussions of this problem in the past, links
to mailing list archives follow. In a few words, a packet coming from an
ipsec tunnel would go through ipfw twice, before and after decryption;
because of that an administrator is quite restricted in filtering of
incoming traffic, potentially allowing undesired traffic "masked" as
decrypted traffic from an ipsec tunnel.

http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=9204+0+archive/2003/freebsd-net/20030105.freebsd-net
http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=582949+0+archive/2002/freebsd-stable/20021124.freebsd-stable

-- 
Andriy Gapon

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030210150116.R53750>