Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 08:59:19 -0700 (PDT) From: David Wolfskill <david@catwhisker.org> To: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RELENG_5 kernel b0rken with IPFIREWALL and without PFIL_HOOKS Message-ID: <200408191559.i7JFxJKo018279@bunrab.catwhisker.org> In-Reply-To: <20040819154334.GA23926@pit.databus.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
>Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:43:34 -0400 >From: Barney Wolff <barney@databus.com> >To: current@freebsd.org >Subject: Re: RELENG_5 kernel b0rken with IPFIREWALL and without PFIL_HOOKS >Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org >I was inspired by the PFIL_HOOKS discussion to check my firewall rules :) Checking firewall rules is a Good Thing. :-) >There were none, other than 65535. Apparently, /etc/rc.d/ipfw attempts >to kldload ipfw, which will fail if ipfw is compiled into the kernel, >and since the precmd failed, the _cmd will not be run. When did it >become mandatory to have ipfw as a module, not compiled in? Is there >some rationale for this? It strikes me as rather dangerous, especially >for firewalls, especially when default-to-accept is chosen. Am I just >confused, and missing some obvious bit of config? Well, color me confused, then: g1-15(5.2-C)[1] uname -a FreeBSD g1-15.catwhisker.org 5.2-CURRENT FreeBSD 5.2-CURRENT #273: Wed Aug 18 15:55:18 PDT 2004 root@g1-15.catwhisker.org:/common/S2/obj/usr/src/sys/LAPTOP_30W i386 g1-15(5.2-C)[2] sudo ipfw list Password: 00100 allow ip from any to any via lo0 00200 deny ip from any to 127.0.0.0/8 00300 deny ip from 127.0.0.0/8 to any .... 03200 deny log ip from any to any 65535 deny ip from any to any g1-15(5.2-C)[3] kldstat Id Refs Address Size Name 1 7 0xc0400000 4b9ac4 kernel 2 14 0xc08ba000 536b0 acpi.ko 3 1 0xc1829000 17000 linux.ko g1-15(5.2-C)[4] Or am I missing your point? >Is it relevant that my /usr is on vinum, and the rules are in /usr/local/etc? Hmm... dunno. I'm not using vinum, and my rules are created via a shell script from a template on /etc (via dhcp-exit-hooks). Peace, david -- David H. Wolfskill david@catwhisker.org Evidence of curmudgeonliness: becoming irritated with the usage of the word "speed" in contexts referring to quantification of network performance, as opposed to "bandwidth" or "latency."home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200408191559.i7JFxJKo018279>