Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 03:55:01 +0300 (MSK) From: "."@babolo.ru To: Josh Brooks <user@mail.econolodgetulsa.com> Cc: Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net>, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: What is my next step as a script kiddie ? (DDoS) Message-ID: <1042332901.347040.69073.nullmailer@cicuta.babolo.ru> In-Reply-To: <20030111150725.E78856-100000@mail.econolodgetulsa.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Thanks for your help - two last questions regarding this: > > 1. On a FreeBSD router/firewall, does it take more processing power to > respond to (and reset) a SYN to a target IP:port that is nonexistent than > it does to respond to a target IP:port that is in heavy use ? > > that is, is there some caching mechanism in use that makes incoming DoS > packets to _already busy_ IP:ports "cost less" in terms of processor than > SYN packets to IP:ports that don't exist ? Just curious. I think (when looking for my routers) that exact ipfw rules have much more influence on CPU usage. But _why_ ever your router responds? Just drop everything come to router with dst == any of router IP exept some ICMP. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1042332901.347040.69073.nullmailer>