similar to: IPFW and icmp

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

Hi peeps, After compiling ipfw into the new 6.2 kernel, and typing "ipfw list", all I get is: "65535 deny ip from any to any" From reading the docs, this might indicate that this is the default rule. (I am certainly protected this way--but can't be very productive ;^) ) By the way, when I run "man ipfw" I get nothing. Using this instead:

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

I am trying to limit outgoing SMTP traffic to about 14 Mbps and these are the IPFW rules I am using. ${fwcmd} add pipe 1 tcp from 192.168.0.0/24 to any 25 out via dc0 ${fwcmd} pipe 1 config bw 14Mbit/s I've tried multiple tweaks to the pipe rule and I seem to be missing something. I only get about half the bandwidth I specify. Is this normal behavior? Is there something wrong

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

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

Hi. We just opened a gaming center and have chosen to run a FreeBsd box for our firewall. IPFW is configured at it's very basic running natd through rl0 and allowing any to any connections from the lan to the outer world. Natd controls access to the lan. We have a 6.0 mb/s ADSL net connection for all the gaming clients to use, however if a gamer starts downloading a file, that file

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

The man page gives this example, however, when I attempt to use it, it seems to block the whole set? Could someone tell me what's going wrong here please. Thanks heaps.. This works, ${fwcmd} add deny log all from any to 203.1.96.1 in via ${oif} This blocks the whole IP block, not just the list? ${fwcmd} add deny log all from any to 203.1.96.0/24{2,6-25,27-154,156-19

What would be a good POP daemon to use? I know there are a few in the mail ports. Are they any good? What I mean by good is 'secure as possible' (is there really such thing as being totally secure / invulnerable?) Cheers

Dear All. I want to use 'not' for 2 addresses (for both) in ipfw2 rule. The only way that looks like what I need is # ipfw add count from IP1 to not IP2,IP3 But does this rule indeed makes what I want? Does it count all packets destined to addresses other then IP2 AND IP3?! No other syntax works. For example more logically correct not IP2 AND not IP3 or even not { IP2 or IP3 } are

Hi, > On Sat, Nov 20, 2004 at 01:32:15PM -0500, Francisco Reyes wrote: >> I have a grown list of IPs that I am "deny ip from ###.### to any". Infected machines, hackers, etc.. >> >> Is there a way to have this list outside of rc.firewall and just read it in? > from man ipfw LOOKUP TABLES Lookup tables are useful to handle large sparse address sets, typically

Hi security@ list, In my self written, large ipfw rule set, I had something that passed http to allow me to browse most but not all remote sites. For years I assumed the few sites I had difficulty with were cases pppoed MTU != 1500, from not having installed tcpmssd on my 4.*-RELEASE, but then running 6.1-RELEASE I realised that wasn't the problem. http://www.web.de Still failed, &

Well, after working through the various options it looked like MPD would be my best bet here. I've got it sort of working, but there's obviously some tweaky I'm missing here. Recap of the scenario: Full class C of static IPs segmented into 3 networks. Outside, DMZ, Inside. Trying to get remote Windows users through securely to the Inside. Remote users have dynamic IPs.

Hi all, I am looking at securing a web server using the FreeBSD MAC Framework. To make things clear I will call the hosted users "web users". Those are the issues I am dealing with: ** Network Security ** - Web users shouldn't be able to connect to reserved local ports apart from 25(smtp); 80(http); 443(https) and 3306(MySQL) Solution: run the web server and web users shell in

I get this in my security postings. Jun [undisclosed time] [undiscl.] login: 2 LOGIN FAILURES ON ttyv2 Jun [undisclosed time] [undiscl.] login: 2 LOGIN FAILURES ON ttyv2, qmaild As it turns out, I'm not running qmail :) And if I did, it would definitely have a nologin shell. But that's beside the point- I have had a perception that ttyv was for local/console logins, and that just

On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org wrote: > Send freebsd-security mailing list submissions to > freebsd-security@freebsd.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >

Hi, I need to know what the implications are to make use of the hosts.allow file on a FreeBSD Production Server (ISP Setup)? The reason I'm asking, is that I've recently decommisioned a Linux SendMail Server to a FreeBSD Exim Server, but with no Firewall (IPTABLES) yet. Besides the fact that it only runs EXIM and Apache, is it necessary to Configure rc.Firewall? or can I only make use of

>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.

Hi, Two quick questions that I can't seem to find answers for using google. 1) is is possible to listen outside an ipfw firewall - that is have ethereal record the packets before ipfw starts dropping them? If so how? 2) Is there an api to ipfw that will let me manipulate rules, query stats etc? I need something faster than running the command line binary? Thanks John