From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Fri Jul 24 01:22:53 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7630F36A48A for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 01:22:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-wr1-x435.google.com (mail-wr1-x435.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::435]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BCWfN4jrpz4Q47 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 01:22:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com) Received: by mail-wr1-x435.google.com with SMTP id f1so6284902wro.2 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 18:22:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8eCXFDRfYnndVHx9m/HQfKvDOaeizmSTuTvdhbw/JvE=; b=EuqsvNMbCnRTdac3AUOnpfm9jq81u/njd4/EzquFvO7oCfE+jyNjm5HLufIXrw5FBJ KMNYAgOcXQJArMdjeBPWUwJrsdOX403BuZz6u25SDV1cIQxiZ0cOOG92B9cBkBn7GPXE iKQSqxREAyhbHmBPvcogheWnJkLGqc9RViqE2uy7zgtzKkH32s24wP3SN/nWDkqauzW3 FUtiU0oijGZbT0DKEO28f2PnnZtky02srU9CwiSAn6Cpju2f3GtvsPnyutSQMZqn0b7k fSkTD/dRyX2bRIivCk/zL88MtjQ91pNXSC5R9LvlKzUoutCiWf33cwoHqdJDYEzBZvjH K32g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531DEVoeH/ywQR3kWaaWj9tcDT3FYbswnvxHrehogOwbogHiXb5t v+HcgWL/jaJGN5CIVktHjSx/yXUf X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwQ+HSOfw/QJ0jOif2l/av+JZH1R1QaAaEmBZuS9da4AU2KLl9d5mlMtvVUbJnqpASS37qn+w== X-Received: by 2002:adf:a1c6:: with SMTP id v6mr6244800wrv.197.1595553770832; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 18:22:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gumby.homeunix.com ([2.222.65.254]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a134sm5820321wmd.17.2020.07.23.18.22.49 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 18:22:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 02:22:47 +0100 From: RW To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ipfw is making contact with 198.61.170.85 port 4021 Message-ID: <20200724022247.59475066@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <5F1A354B.7030508@gmail.com> References: <5F1A354B.7030508@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.5 (GTK+ 2.24.32; amd64-portbld-freebsd12.1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4BCWfN4jrpz4Q47 X-Spamd-Bar: -- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.92 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[googlemail.com:s=20161025]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[2.222.65.254:received]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[googlemail.com]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.89)[-0.895]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.70)[-0.702]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip6:2a00:1450:4000::/36]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[googlemail.com:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[googlemail.com,quarantine]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[2a00:1450:4864:20::435:from]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.32)[-0.324]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[googlemail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2a00:1450::/32, country:US]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; DWL_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[googlemail.com:dkim] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 01:22:53 -0000 On Thu, 23 Jul 2020 21:11:39 -0400 Ernie Luzar wrote: > A firewall should not be making its own contact with any public ip > address. This is a security hole. > > I have not played with ipfw since before it was rewritten to become > ipfw2 so I do not know when this internal "call home" function was > added. pf and ipf are not doing this. I block it to be secure. > > Can any one provide any info about this? It might help if you explain what you have actually seen.