Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 1 Nov 2001 06:35:16 -0200
From:      "Mario de Oliveira Lobo Neto" <Mlobo@ear.com.br>
To:        cjclark@alum.mit.edu
Cc:        freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: can I use keep-state for icmp rules?
Message-ID:  <3BE0FB2F.32137.8E1D80C@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <20011031131434.B246@gohan.cjclark.org>
References:  <20011031152625.8040B137CB@xlr82xs.shacknet.nu>; from xlr82xs@xlr82xs.shacknet.nu on Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 01:26:21AM %2B1000

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 01:26:21AM +1000, David Trzcinski wrote:
> [snip]
> 
> > i dont use keep-state for my tcp either, with
> > 
> > ipfw add allow tcp from any to any out via <interface>
> > ipfw add allow log tcp from any to any 80 in via <interface> setup
> > ipfw add allow tcp from any to any in via <interface> connected
> > ipfw add deny log tcp from any to any in via <interface>
> > 
> > which, as far as i know should stop the problems mentioned with useing 
> > keepstate..
> > 
> > if i'm wrong, please tell me :)
> 
> Doing a stateless packet filter for TCP has some problems. It is
> trivial to scan for the topology of the network behind the firewall
> for example. It is possible to fingerprint network stacks to some
> extent through a stateless packet filter.
> -- 
> Crist J. Clark                           cjclark@alum.mit.edu

Forgive me if this is a stupid question but could you give a hint (or 
directions to learn) when and in which type/port ipfw rules shoud 
keepstate be used ?

Thanks
-
*** Mario Lobo
*** Head of Computer Department
*** American School of Recife

 

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?3BE0FB2F.32137.8E1D80C>