Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      17 Dec 2002 16:59:37 -0600
From:      Craig Boston <craig@meoqu.gank.org>
To:        Clifton Royston <cliftonr@lava.net>
Cc:        stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: ipfilter / ipnat quandry
Message-ID:  <1040165976.4062.8.camel@owen1492.it.oot>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 13:02, Clifton Royston wrote: 
>   ipf does have the ability to more correctly simulate a closed port. 
> I did a similar exercise on my personal OpenBSD firewall box earlier
> this year; I won't go through your whole ruleset, but basically for
> every TCP port you block, you need to add a return-rst, and for every
> UDP port you block, you need to add return-icmp(port-unr).  This
> provides a pretty good simulation of a host running no services, if
> that's what you want to look like.

Does ipfw or ipf have the ability to return a SYN/ACK packet for each
incoming SYN, and return an appropriate ACK any incoming ACK packets?
(mischievous grin)

Craig


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1040165976.4062.8.camel>