From owner-freebsd-ipfw  Tue Jul 27 11:59:37 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
Received: from aurora.sol.net (aurora.sol.net [206.55.65.76])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 9B2EC14BEE; Tue, 27 Jul 1999 11:59:26 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from jgreco@aurora.sol.net)
Received: (from jgreco@localhost)
	by aurora.sol.net (8.9.2/8.9.2/SNNS-1.02) id NAA09676;
	Tue, 27 Jul 1999 13:59:16 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joe Greco <jgreco@ns.sol.net>
Message-Id: <199907271859.NAA09676@aurora.sol.net>
Subject: Re: securelevel and ipfw zero
In-Reply-To: <199907271715.LAA25892@mt.sri.com> from Nate Williams at "Jul 27, 1999 11:15:11 am"
To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams)
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 13:59:16 -0500 (CDT)
Cc: julian@whistle.com, green@FreeBSD.ORG,
	dillon@apollo.backplane.com, jgreco@ns.sol.net, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG,
	freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> > I like the ability at secure level 3 to only reset the counters forward..
> > It fits in with such things as the "append only" flag.
> 
> Then we'd have to implement per-rule counters that default to
> IPFW_VERBOSE_LIMIT but that could be changed to anything.  That's a very
> different setup than what we currently have.
> 
> (Another thing I just thought of is that this could cause DoS attacks on
> the system if a user compromised root and then set the limit to a very
> high number.)

This is already possible via sysctl, the VERBOSE_LIMIT variable may be
altered.

... Joe

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Greco - Systems Administrator			      jgreco@ns.sol.net
Solaria Public Access UNIX - Milwaukee, WI			   414/342-4847


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