On Tuesday 20 December 2005 09:48, Tom Eastep wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 December 2005 09:29, Timothy J. Massey wrote:
> > It adds 2 more logging lines, but it only affects the logging rules for
> > the 3 ports we're interested in, rather than the 65,000 or so that we're
> > not.  Am I missing something?
>
> Yes -- why in the world would you send traffic for the other 65,000 through
> this action in the first place? The intent of the original code on the web
> site is that we log accepted SSH traffic with a disposition of ACCEPT while
> we log the knocks and disables with a disposition of DROP (which is
> actually what happens). It is assumed that only traffic destined for *those
> three ports* will ever go through the chain.

Doh -- can't count this morning; should have been "those four ports".

-Tom
-- 
Tom Eastep    \ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool
Shoreline,     \ http://shorewall.net
Washington USA  \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Public Key   \ https://lists.shorewall.net/teastep.pgp.key

Attachment: pgpJ5kOAweRnr.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to