RE: Open BSD 3.9 unable to send email with attachment thru pf firewall.

2006-06-27 Thread Ajith Kumar
Hi Ajith Kumar wrote: Hi I got your email address from Open BSD mailing lists.I hope you can help me Some more information would be helpfull. Your OpenBSD setup, PF Configuration, E-Mail Client / Server, internet connection. Hi It is a simple connection. The client is contacting the

RE: Open BSD 3.9 unable to send email with attachment thru pffirewall.

2006-06-27 Thread Ajith Kumar
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:14:54 +0530 Ajith Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ajith, what exactly seems to be the problem? PF does not do any application layer filtering. If you are having trouble sending an email, you should verify with the recipient that the email server at the remote end is

blocking on scan attempts

2006-06-27 Thread nobiscuit
Hello, I have a simple firewall set up with OpenBSD 3.9 and have been playing around with logging ssh login attempts to my DMZ server and banishing IPs using max-src-conn -rate ... block quick from banish pass in log quick on $ext_if proto tcp from any to $dmz_ip port = ssh flags S/SA synproxy

RE: Open BSD 3.9 Pf issue with email with attachments.

2006-06-27 Thread Ajith Kumar
On 06/26/2006 09:17:33 AM, Ajith Kumar wrote: Ajith Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am able to send and receive mails . But if there is any attachment which is bigger than 64 KB, i am not able to send. Peter N. M. Hansteen Writes : My first impulse is to look at what happens

Re: Open BSD 3.9 unable to send email with attachment thru pffirewall.

2006-06-27 Thread Lars Hansson
On Tuesday 27 June 2006 11:34, Ajith Kumar wrote: There is no problem with mail server.If I disable pf by pfctl -d , I am able to send mails with attachments. There's no problem with pf either since it does not do any application layer filtering. Perhaps you're doing something stupid like

Re: Open BSD 3.9 Pf issue with email with attachments.

2006-06-27 Thread Daniel Hartmeier
On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 09:17:18AM +0530, Ajith Kumar wrote: I had modified the entry like this pass in quick log on fxp0 from any to x.x.x.x keep state flags S/SA #1 pass out quick log on fxp1 from any to x.x.x.x keep state flags S/SA #2 pass in quick log on fxp1 from x.x.x.x to

Re: Open BSD 3.9 unable to send email with attachment thru pf

2006-06-27 Thread Peter N. M. Hansteen
Ajith Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If I disable pf I am able to send mails with attachments.It looks like problem with firewall itself. The problem here is that you keep repeating a very vague description of symptoms without giving us any information which could point us in the right

queueing: give some BW to each addr (in a table)?

2006-06-27 Thread McLone
Hello. I work for small isp, and we want to make customer plan look like this: client A has N kbits/s while business day; he has N*2 kbits/s at night and weekends; and we guarantee to him minimum speed of N/2. (we also buying our main uplink BW according to this formula) We have many

Re: Open BSD 3.9 Pf issue with email with attachments.

2006-06-27 Thread Tim Donahue
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:56:46 +0200 Daniel Hartmeier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 09:17:18AM +0530, Ajith Kumar wrote: I had modified the entry like this pass in quick log on fxp0 from any to x.x.x.x keep state flags S/ SA #1 pass out quick log on fxp1 from any

Re: blocking on scan attempts

2006-06-27 Thread Darrin Chandler
On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 07:45:07PM -0700, nobiscuit wrote: I gather it is possible to add IP addresses to a table using pfctl run with a cron job based on what has been logged from pf. However, this cron job would have to be run frequently to be any more effective than the banish rule listed

Re: blocking on scan attempts

2006-06-27 Thread Travis H.
On 6/27/06, Darrin Chandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been through the documentaion and this mailing list. Is there another way to add IP addresses to a table directly using a rule in pf.conf? I can see the little bastards coming and I'd like to cut them off as quickly as possible.

Re: blocking on scan attempts

2006-06-27 Thread Darrin Chandler
On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 02:38:06PM -0500, Travis H. wrote: There's some discussion there as to the wisdom of this, since scans are trivially spoofed, it could lead to a DoS. I'm usually on the side against blocking. My reasons, more or less in order: * It wastes time and resources * Possible