Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 22 May 2007 11:13:20 +0200
From:      Ian FREISLICH <ianf@clue.co.za>
To:        =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com>
Subject:   Re: em0 hijacking traffic to port 623 
Message-ID:  <E1HqQQi-0000yl-ML@clue.co.za>
In-Reply-To: Message from =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no>  of "Tue, 22 May 2007 10:37:09 %2B0200." <86zm3xmeyy.fsf@dwp.des.no> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
=?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= wrote:
> Ian FREISLICH <ianf@clue.co.za> writes:
> > No, it's a March 6 current.  How safe is it to just update the
> > sys/dev/em directory and recompile?  Quite a lot has changed in
> > CURRENT since then and I don't want to update everything on these
> > servers just yet.
> 
> Quick workaround: configure inetd to listen to port 623 so rpcbind
> won't assign these ports to the NFS server.  Something like this:
> 
> asf-rmcp dgram  udp     nowait  root    /bin/false              false
> asf-rmcp stream tcp     nowait  root    /bin/false              false

This won't help me.

These hosts are routers for several large datacenters.  They're
blackholing all traffic with a destination port of 623 and probably
664 in hardware.  I wouldn't mind so much if it just did it for
it's own IP.

Ian

--
Ian Freislich




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E1HqQQi-0000yl-ML>