Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 18:19:49 +0100 From: Paul Macdonald <paul@ifdnrg.com> To: Michael Sierchio <kudzu@tenebras.com> Cc: Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ipfw subnetting Message-ID: <4FBA7935.7090000@ifdnrg.com> In-Reply-To: <4FBA66DA.7040902@ifdnrg.com> References: <20120521120027.716761065686@hub.freebsd.org> <20120521232412.B98171@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <4FBA5FB3.5010900@ifdnrg.com> <CAHu1Y719HRS2-tNKTZa5qaeyG78F6KXKrTEkphF9PYSGfPBGNw@mail.gmail.com> <4FBA66DA.7040902@ifdnrg.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 21/05/2012 17:01, Paul Macdonald wrote: > On 21/05/2012 16:44, Michael Sierchio wrote: >> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Paul Macdonald<paul@ifdnrg.com> wrote: >> >>> A very open firewall test script is as follows: >>> this is now resolved, i hadn't realised (embarrassingly) that ipfw list will show rules if if the fw is disabled. at some point during debugging i think i'd disabled the firewall and not re-enabled, and on seeing rules listed assumed it was actually on this was web traffic, coming in from 5-6 very wide ranges, with a referrer of http://bdsclickcenter.com/en/surf/view/75967 Not sure why they've become interested in one of my clients sites, but they have probably hit the server from several 100k ip's. mod_rewrite has been serving them 403's for over 24 hrs, but that doesn't seem to bother them! thanks to those who took the time to help. -- ------------------------- Paul Macdonald IFDNRG Ltd Web and video hosting ------------------------- t: 0131 5548070 m: 07970339546<<PLEASE NOTE NEW MOBILE<< e: paul@ifdnrg.com w: http://www.ifdnrg.com ------------------------- IFDNRG 40 Maritime Street Edinburgh EH6 6SA -------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FBA7935.7090000>