Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 11:15:11 -0600 From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> Cc: "Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.ORG>, Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, Joe Greco <jgreco@ns.sol.net>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: securelevel and ipfw zero Message-ID: <199907271715.LAA25892@mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.990726204047.28343P-100000@current1.whistle.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9907262322120.35843-100000@janus.syracuse.net> <Pine.BSF.3.95.990726204047.28343P-100000@current1.whistle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I like the ability at secure level 3 to only reset the counters forward.. > It fits in with such things as the "append only" flag. Then we'd have to implement per-rule counters that default to IPFW_VERBOSE_LIMIT but that could be changed to anything. That's a very different setup than what we currently have. (Another thing I just thought of is that this could cause DoS attacks on the system if a user compromised root and then set the limit to a very high number.) Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199907271715.LAA25892>