Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 27 Oct 2003 09:34:37 -0000
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        Jarkko Santala <jake@iki.fi>
Cc:        Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject:   Re: Best way to filter "Nachi pings"?
Message-ID:  <20031027093435.GA6111@rot13.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <20031027110203.B96390@trillian.santala.org>
References:  <200310270731.AAA23485@lariat.org> <20031027080240.GA9552@rot13.obsecurity.org> <20031027110203.B96390@trillian.santala.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--1yeeQ81UyVL57Vl7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 11:06:52AM +0200, Jarkko Santala wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>=20
> > On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 12:31:46AM -0700, Brett Glass wrote:
> > > We're being ping-flooded by the Nachi worm, which probes subnets for
> > > systems to attack by sending 92-byte ping packets. Unfortunately,
> > > IPFW doesn't seem to have the ability to filter packets by length.
> > > Assuming that I stick with IPFW, what's the best way to stem the
> > > tide?
> >
> > Block all ping packets?  Most security-conscious admins do this
>=20
> D'oh? I like ping very much and it would make me very sad indeed if I
> couldn't ping my boxes to solve possible network problems along the way. I
> fail to see the security problem and possible DoS issues could be solved
> by using limiting of sort.

The security and DoS concerns are really kind of obvious.

No-one has a gun to your head though, so I fail to see why you're
complaining that someone else might do this on their own network.

> Definitely this block-all approach is not sane, its like if someone
> complains about NFS being broken you'd say disable it. Filtering packets
> by length on the other hand is a very nice feature to have.

As it happens, ipfw[2] does this anyway.

Kris
--1yeeQ81UyVL57Vl7
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE/nOaqWry0BWjoQKURArhbAJ9dQgwTmZE5jALrbWKwLZrHzy3gYQCfUUww
lFaiqUBTj+kcAPbtGFBlxyw=
=95JV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--1yeeQ81UyVL57Vl7--


Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031027093435.GA6111>