Current problem reports assigned to you

Current FreeBSD problem reports Critical problems Serious problems S Submitted Tracker Resp. Description --- o [2003/04/22] kern/51274 ipfwipfw2 create dynamic rules with parent nu f [2003/04/24]

Current problem reports assigned to you

Current FreeBSD problem reports Critical problems Serious problems Non-critical problems S Submitted Tracker Resp. Description --- a [2001/04/13] kern/26534 ipfwAdd an option to ipfw to log gid/uid

layer2 filtering and dummynet, bw reduced by half

Hello, I am doing some simple tests in a specific enviroment where layer2 filtering and dummynet will work together. There is a complex set of FW rules, which showed a behaviour where, whenever I turn layer2 filtering on, dummynet configured pipes get the configured BW reduced by half. To

Re: layer2 filtering and dummynet, bw reduced by half

you are passing traffic through the pipe twice. you have to decide if your rules should apply tto layer2 or not and write the rules accordingly luigi On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 01:07:56PM -0300, Patrick Tracanelli wrote: Hello, I am doing some simple tests in a specific enviroment where

Re: layer2 filtering and dummynet, bw reduced by half

Luigi Rizzo wrote: you are passing traffic through the pipe twice. you have to decide if your rules should apply tto layer2 or not and write the rules accordingly Why are they going twice through the pipe? When net.link.ether.ipfw=1 you pass it through all rules twice? first match wins does

Re: layer2 filtering and dummynet, bw reduced by half

see the ipfw manpage near the eginning with the graph showing the packet flow. layer2 means the rule matches only on layer2. not layer2 matches only on layer 3. if you don't put anything, it matches both layer2 and layer3. luigi On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 01:27:39PM -0300, Patrick Tracanelli

ipfw: unrecognised option [-1] tcp

Hi all, I'm a bit confused here, please give me some light. My problem is that after the rule 190 (see them bellow) I get this error message: ipfw: unrecognised option [-1] tcp But it´s not only after 190, if I remove it the problem keeps. Here is the begining of

Automatically add attacks to deny list?

Hi, Whenever someone tries a portscan or http server vulnerability scan on my system, I have to manually add their ip in my /etc/ipfw.conf file such as: add 100 deny all from xx.xxx.xxx.xxx to any Is there a way, without enabling blackhole, to dynamically add ips to my blacklist after a

Re: Automatically add attacks to deny list?

Hi all, There is a program called tcpsentry... doesn't it have the ability to do this? -- Colin On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Nicolas Blais wrote: Hi, Whenever someone tries a portscan or http server vulnerability scan on my system, I have to manually add their ip in my /etc/ipfw.conf

Re: Automatically add attacks to deny list?

Whenever someone tries a portscan or http server vulnerability scan on my=20 system, I have to manually add their ip in my /etc/ipfw.conf file such as: add 100 deny all from xx.xxx.xxx.xxx to any Is there a way, without enabling blackhole, to dynamically add ips to my=20 blacklist after a

Re: Automatically add attacks to deny list?

On Monday 03 October 2005 22:15, Olivier Nicole wrote: Whenever someone tries a portscan or http server vulnerability scan on my=20 system, I have to manually add their ip in my /etc/ipfw.conf file such as: add 100 deny all from xx.xxx.xxx.xxx to any so why you would do that at all? you

Re: nonprivileged access to ipfw

Andrey V. Elsukov wrote: I want a nonprivileged access to ipfw (without sudo, suid and etc..). But RAW sockets restrict this. I have an one idea - a pseudo device /dev/ipfw. I think that realisation of this feature is not difficult task. Now i have some questions. Thanks for more answers :) I