On 9/6/2015 3:17 AM, Ob Noxious wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Please disregard my previous comment about the invalid TCP flags FIN,RST
> and PSH,FIN passing through "tcpflags" chain. They indeed passthrough
> but are blocked later by the "?SECTION INVALID" of the "rules" file.
> They simply were silently dropped because INVALID_LOG_LEVEL was unset in
> shorewall.conf :-)

That only works if INVALID_DISPOSITION is set to drop those packets. So
it's probably best if I go ahead and add them to the set of flags
specifically filtered by
> 
> About this setting, and more generally, all *_LOG_LEVEL in
> shorewall.conf, it would be very nice to be able to use the extended
> format for specifying the log level. I'm starting to really enjoy this
> new and highly flexible format :-)
> 
> ex: "INVALID_LOG_LEVEL=info:,Invalid" would produce (in logs) the
> slightly more useful "xxx:_net-fw:Invalid:IN=eth0" rather than the
> default "xxx:_net-fw::IN=eth0" which does not really gives information.

Added to the list for 5.0.0.

> 
> Thankfully I was able to workaround the limitation with a line in
> "rules" file : LOG:info:,Invalid { source=all dest=all }
> 
> I'm really enjoying Shorewall for now. It's a bit "complex" for the
> newcomer but highly configurable, to an impressive level I must say.
> 

Glad to hear that it is working for you.

-Tom
-- 
Tom Eastep        \ When I die, I want to go like my Grandfather who
Shoreline,         \ died peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming like
Washington, USA     \ all of the passengers in his car
http://shorewall.net \________________________________________________

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users

Reply via email to