Re: [pfSense Support] MAC based Access Control

2010-11-29 Thread James Bensley
I think it would be an useful feature to have; if you have a pfsense box at the end of a leased line, private virtual circuit or vpn, it would be good to check the device at the other has x MAC address to try and rule out any security features like a MITM attack or something like that... Just my

Re: [pfSense Support] MAC based Access Control

2010-11-29 Thread Seth Mos
Op 29-11-2010 10:51, James Bensley schreef: I think it would be an useful feature to have; if you have a pfsense box at the end of a leased line, private virtual circuit or vpn, it would be good to check the device at the other has x MAC address to try and rule out any security features like a

Re: [pfSense Support] MAC based Access Control

2010-11-29 Thread Gerald A
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 4:51 AM, James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com wrote: I think it would be an useful feature to have; if you have a pfsense box at the end of a leased line, private virtual circuit or vpn, it would be good to check the device at the other has x MAC address to try and rule

Re: [pfSense Support] MAC based Access Control

2010-11-29 Thread Adam Piasecki
On 11/29/2010 5:18 AM, Gerald A wrote: On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 4:51 AM, James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com mailto:jwbens...@gmail.com wrote: I think it would be an useful feature to have; if you have a pfsense box at the end of a leased line, private virtual circuit or vpn, it

Re: [pfSense Support] MAC based Access Control

2010-11-29 Thread Vick Khera
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 8:11 AM, Adam Piasecki apiase...@midatlanticbb.com wrote: I understand it's a false sense of security, but I can see how it would be helpful.  Maybe a package can be made with the understanding that its not 100% full proof. So you have a security feature that works,

Re: [pfSense Support] MAC based Access Control

2010-11-29 Thread stephen at stephenjc
I was under the impression that pfsense was layer 3 software. Imo, I don't think it should be dealing with layer 2. You can always use a switch with port security. On Nov 29, 2010 8:21 AM, Vick Khera vi...@khera.org wrote: On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 8:11 AM, Adam Piasecki

RE: [pfSense Support] MAC based Access Control

2010-11-29 Thread Ryan Rodrigue
I there a way to manually specify an IP to a mac in the ARP tables. That way you could filter based on IP and if someone changed their IP to avoid the filters, there internet access wouldn't work. You could then take it a step further and lockdown the switch port to only that one mac and if they

Re: [pfSense Support] MAC based Access Control

2010-11-29 Thread James Bensley
On 29 November 2010 14:18, stephen at stephenjc step...@stephenjc.com wrote: I was under the impression that pfsense was  layer 3 software. Imo, I don't think it should be dealing with layer 2. You can always use a switch with port security. But as Gerald has pointed out; On 29 November 2010

[pfSense Support] (non)local address resolution

2010-11-29 Thread David Burgess
pfsense is setup like this: pfsense--WAN (public IP x) --OPT1 (public IP y/30) Connected to OPT1 is client's cisco firewall which is NATing for a 172.21.50/23 subnet. Their dhcp is handing out pfsense's OPT1 address as DNS server, and pfsense is running DNS forwarder. This works well,

Re: [pfSense Support] MAC based Access Control

2010-11-29 Thread Chris Buechler
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 4:51 AM, James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com wrote: I think it would be an useful feature to have; if you have a pfsense box at the end of a leased line, private virtual circuit or vpn, it would be good to check the device at the other has x MAC address to try and rule out