bugzilla-daemon at netfilter.org
2013-Jul-09 01:50 UTC
[Bug 616] Duplicate rules for multi-homed hostnames. IPv4 and IPv6 inconsistent treatment.
https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=616 --- Comment #6 from Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> 2013-07-09 03:50:27 CEST --- Yes, I fully understand what is happening in the one specific example you have provided. However you need to answer what happens if Cloudmark suddenly decides to add an IP _OUTSIDE_ of that /22 that is assigned to them. Let's say they open a new datacenter using subnet 1.2.3.0/24. Your rule will now allow 1.2.0.0/22 even though they don't necessarily own that entire /22. And you won't even know about this change because of how you have specified a DNS name with a CIDR mask (unless you happen to look at iptables -nvL output someday). My point remains: what you are doing is inherently dangerous, and not something which should be promoted as "good firewall policy". -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
Apparently Analagous Threads
- [Bug 616] Duplicate rules for multi-homed hostnames. IPv4 and IPv6 inconsistent treatment.
- [Bug 616] Duplicate rules for multi-homed hostnames. IPv4 and IPv6 inconsistent treatment.
- [Bug 616] Duplicate rules for multi-homed hostnames. IPv4 and IPv6 inconsistent treatment.
- [Bug 616] New: Duplicate rules for multi-homed hostnames. IPv4 and IPv6 inconsistent treatment.
- [Bug 616] Duplicate rules for multi-homed hostnames. IPv4 and IPv6 inconsistent treatment.