similar to: IPFW compiled in kernel: Where is it reading the config?

Dear W.D. Do you understand that by adding the rules into kernel space numbered from zero to sixty five thousand five hundred thirty four you may alter the behavior of the rule number sixty five thousand five hundred thirty five can you please define and list the goals you are trying to achieve by altering default rule in the terms you can both explain and understand. ----- Original Message

>Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 06:04:02 -0800 (PST) >From: Nash Nipples <trashy_bumper@yahoo.com> >To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org >Subject: Re: IPFW: Blocking me out. How to debug? > >Dear W.D. > >oh come on. i have the same problem. Which problem are we talking about? cut and paste problem. >cut and paste logic: > >#!/bin/sh >#1. count packets >#2.

If someone has some free time, can you go over my ipfw config. See if I have any problems, or things i should add. Im not an ipfw expert or anything. Here is the config. add 100 allow all from any to any via lo0 add 110 deny log all from any to 127.0.0.0/8 add 120 deny log ip from 127.0.0.0/8 to any add 00200 check-state add 00250 deny all from any to any frag in via bge0 add 00260 deny

550.ipfwlimit check in /etc/periodic/security takes into account only global/default verbosity limit and does not account for a specific logging limit set for a particular rule e.g.: $ ipfw -a l | fgrep log 65000 *521* 41764 deny log logamount *1000* ip from any to any $ sysctl -n net.inet.ip.fw.verbose_limit *100* >From security run output: ipfw log limit reached: 65000 519

Hi there, Is there some way to configure ipfw to do traffic normalizing ("scrubbing", as in ipf for OpenBSD)? Is there any tool to do it for FreeBSD firewalling? I've heard that ipf was ported on current, anything else? TIA, /Dorin. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools

heya i've been using freebsd's ipfw for quite a while and recently on a new server i've got this issue with ipfw that i can't understand ... something is wrong ... 01000 8042 1947866 allow ip from any to any via fxp0 01010 0 0 allow ip from any to any via lo0 01014 9886 4170269 divert 8668 ip from any to any in via vr0 01015 0 0 check-state 01130 14679 5695969 skipto 1800 ip from

I have a FreeBSD box acting as a firewall and NAT gateway I would like to set it up to transparently pass IPSec packets -- I have an IPSec VPN client running on another machine, connecting to a remote network. Is there a way to do this? I can't find any hints in the man pages.

In my recent security email, I got the following errors: cantona.dnswatchdog.com login failures: Aug 20 02:37:19 cantona sshd[9444]: fatal: Write failed: Operation not permitted Aug 20 04:30:42 cantona sshd[16142]: fatal: Write failed: Operation not permitted Aug 20 21:21:51 cantona sshd[45716]: fatal: Write failed: Operation not permitted So three questions: What is it? Should I be worried?

Hi all: I have strange probelm with rc.conf. I set up ipfw (compiled into kernel) on freebsd-5.4 and it doesn't seem to load ipfw rulesets (it uses default ruleset 65335 locking out everything). I have to do "sh /etc/ipfw.rules" in order to load the rulesets, once I did that, I can access the box from remote locations here is my rc.conf: host# more /etc/rc.conf

Hi There, I've been having an issue trying to figure out a way to policy route outbound packets from a multihomed machine through the proper interface using IPFW to no avail. I've tried several different incantations of IPFW fwd/forward statements, and none of them seem to do the trick. Basically, I have a host that has multiple Internet connections. This host is running FreeBSD 4.9

I'm not a master of the internet RFCs, but I do believe icmp messages have different types. Now to enable traceroute for IPFW, I might put in a rule like this: ipfw add pass icmp from any to me However, how would I make a rule to limit icmp messages to just those used by traceroute? Can the messages be distinguished as such? A dynamic rule that exists only for the duration of a traceroute

Hi, i've set the outside ip for the jail..It works.. When i try to ssh to jail'ed system from the main system (in which is created jail) the connection is successful, but when i try to connect to jailed system from anywhere else i get this message: ssh: connect to host IP_NUMBER port 22: Operation timed out What can be wrong here? How to solve this problem?

Hi ! First of all, I am sorry if this is not the list for that, but I've been learning (a little bit...) a way to implement a freeBSD firewall. So far I came up with a set of rules I would like to show you for commenting. I am sure there're a lot of errors and/or stupid rules (I am not sure the rules order is good for what I need) and I would be really pleased if one could have a look

We're being ping-flooded by the Nachi worm, which probes subnets for systems to attack by sending 92-byte ping packets. Unfortunately, IPFW doesn't seem to have the ability to filter packets by length. Assuming that I stick with IPFW, what's the best way to stem the tide? --Brett Glass

I have a rather busy Apache 2.2 server; tons of small & some large requests. It's a standard Dell 2650 server using the bge (broadcom) network driver. I seem to have a rather strange problem where after just a day or so Apache just stops processing new connections. You can connect to port 80, but trying to get Apache to process any data just hangs. There is nothing strange in

This note is essentially a request for a reality check. I use IPFW & natd on the box that provides the interface between my home networks and the Internet; the connection is (static) residential DSL. I configured IPFW to accept & log all SSH "setup" requests, and use natd to forward such requests to an internal machine that only accepts public key authentication; that

Hi, I am using IPFW on FreeBSD 4.11 I am facing two problems: - SSH sessions timeout after a while - When I run "/sbin/ipfw -q -f flush" in the rules script all connection get reset (and I am thrown out of the box). Is this standard functioning of ipfw or do I need to change any configuration? Thanks, Siddhartha

I've been using ipfw for a while to create a router with NAT and packet filtering, but have never combined it with stateful filtering, instead using things like "established" to accept incoming TCP packets which are part of a conversation initiated from the "inside". I'd like to move to using keep-state/check-state to get tighter filtering and also to allow outgoing

Hi, I have a system with a 4.11 Kernel. Unless I'm doing something very wrong, there seems to be something odd with ipfw. Take the following rules: ipfw add 00280 allow tcp from any to any 22 out via bge0 setup keep- state ipfw add 00299 deny log all from any to any out via bge0 ipfw add 0430 allow log tcp from any to me 22 in via bge0 setup limit src-addr 2 ipfw add 00499 deny log

I'm forwarding this to security@, as I'm getting no replies on ipfw@. Hope it's relevant enough for you :( ---Original Message----- From: owner-freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Erik Paulsen Skålerud Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 1:02 AM To: ipfw@freebsd.org Subject: Question about logging. Sorry for asking this, It's probably been