Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 11 Feb 2015 11:45:16 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 197536] ipfilter rule removal via command line deletes all rules added after as well
Message-ID:  <bug-197536-8@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197536

            Bug ID: 197536
           Summary: ipfilter rule removal via command line deletes all
                    rules added after as well
           Product: Base System
           Version: 10.1-RELEASE
          Hardware: amd64
                OS: Any
            Status: New
          Severity: Affects Only Me
          Priority: ---
         Component: kern
          Assignee: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
          Reporter: clearscreen@gmail.com

After updating from FreeBSD 9.3-RELEASE #0 r268512 to FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE #0
r274401, which updated IPFilter from v4.1.28 (400) to v5.1.2 (608) the
following command no longer works properly:

echo "block in log level local7.info quick on em1 from 218.77.79.55/32 to any"
| /sbin/ipf -rf - ; echo "block out log level local7.info quick on em1 from any
to 218.77.79.55/32" | /sbin/ipf -rf - ;

By works properly I mean-

In ipfilter v4.1.28 the command above removes the one matching rule specified
in the echo command (which is the expected behavior I believe).

In ipfilter v5.1.2 the command above removes the one matching rule specified in
the echo command AND every rule leading up to it.

Here is an example of what happens in ipfilter v5.1.2 in FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE:

root@perim:~ # ipfstat -lion
@1 pass out all
@2 block out log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from any to
103.41.124.56/32
@3 block out log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from any to
222.186.59.100/32
@4 block out log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from any to
209.251.180.19/32
@5 block out log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from any to
80.82.70.230/32
@6 block out log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from any to
128.208.4.164/32
@7 block out log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from any to
193.0.129.108/32
@8 block out log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from any to
116.104.186.248/32
@9 block out log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from any to
62.210.95.18/32
@1 pass in all
@2 block in log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from 103.41.124.56/32 to
any
@3 block in log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from 222.186.59.100/32 to
any
@4 block in log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from 209.251.180.19/32 to
any
@5 block in log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from 80.82.70.230/32 to any
@6 block in log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from 128.208.4.164/32 to
any
@7 block in log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from 193.0.129.108/32 to
any
@8 block in log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from 116.104.186.248/32 to
any
@9 block in log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from 62.210.95.18/32 to any
root@perim:~ # echo "block in log level local7.info quick on em1 from
128.208.4.164/32 to any" | /sbin/ipf -rf - ; echo "block out log level
local7.info quick on em1 from any to 128.208.4.164/32" | /sbin/ipf -rf - ;
root@perim:~ # ipfstat -lion
@1 pass out all
@2 block out log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from any to
193.0.129.108/32
@3 block out log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from any to
116.104.186.248/32
@4 block out log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from any to
62.210.95.18/32
@1 pass in all
@2 block in log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from 193.0.129.108/32 to
any
@3 block in log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from 116.104.186.248/32 to
any
@4 block in log level local7.info quick on em1 inet from 62.210.95.18/32 to any


In the first command you can see the loaded firewall rules. In the next command
the goal is to remove the block in and out for IP address 128.208.4.164. As you
can see after running the command for removal, a listing of the loaded firewall
rules shows it has deleted every single rule leading up to it.

Is this a bug in my syntax, did the syntax change between ipftiler v4.1.28 and
v5.1.2? Or is it a bug in ipfilter somewhere?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-197536-8>