Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 1 Dec 2000 22:26:29 -0800
From:      "Crist J . Clark" <cjclark@reflexnet.net>
To:        Alan Batie <alan@batie.org>
Cc:        "David G. Andersen" <dga@pobox.com>, Umesh Krishnaswamy <umesh@juniper.net>, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Defeating SYN flood attacks
Message-ID:  <20001201222629.L99903@149.211.6.64.reflexcom.com>
In-Reply-To: <20001201111340.P45293@agora.rdrop.com>; from alan@batie.org on Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 11:13:40AM -0800
References:  <3A27F625.4C87CC7C@juniper.net> <200012011906.MAA25650@faith.cs.utah.edu> <20001201111340.P45293@agora.rdrop.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 11:13:40AM -0800, Alan Batie wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 12:06:45PM -0700, David G. Andersen wrote:
> > FreeBSD has been synflood resistant for several years.  To a first order,
> > you cannot effectively synflood a decently provisioned FreeBSD box and
> > deny service to it UNLESS your "synflood" is really just a bandwidth
> > consumption attack that eats up all of their bandwidth.
> > 
> > There was a problem that cropped up about a year ago where a *really high
> > volume* syn flood could cause some kernel problems, but that's fixed in
> > all of the recent 4.x versions.  Really high volume means 10Mbps+.
> 
> I was just subject to such an attack last weekend; I'm running 4.1-RELEASE
> at the moment.  The attack was SYNs from a large number of (probably
> spoofed, randomly generated) addresses to a sequence of ports.  The reason
> I noticed it was because the port unreachable icmp messages exceeded the
> default icmp bandwidth limit and the console and syslog were filled with
> the resulting messages about that.  The attack ran from Friday evening
> until Monday morning.  I'm not sure if it's related, but it's suspicious,
> that the system under attack crashed (wedged) Sunday morning.

You are not describing a SYN attack. A SYN attack does not produce
ICMP port unreachables. A SYN attack is focused on _open_ _TCP_
ports. Port unreachables are produced by _closed_ _UDP_ ports. And if
you hit a closed TCP port with a SYN, you get a TCP RST, not a ICMP
message.
-- 
Crist J. Clark                           cjclark@alum.mit.edu


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001201222629.L99903>