From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Sep 16 13:34:46 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E1A7B04
 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 13:34:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22d.google.com (mail-oi0-x22d.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22d])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC5C3E0B
 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 13:34:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-oi0-f45.google.com with SMTP id v63so3308835oia.4
 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 06:34:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
 :content-type; bh=lqO5R5iFRNXHDEwnlAFYYRoj7VmDK/dBihFu7xApMwA=;
 b=DJOZfGnXhrNgwV3XlwicGJGSOr9t2mP5E6+RXC9NpHncKnlh1vGqtiMYBo20zMagjr
 NdL1bxpYqGOwh/sHYcfAGdBAYvLXfkEC0uuswUx/HZUyrxZL1i0bjfWMdMhftwoyyCHr
 flKzgKpZv+ywviQ4B2/GoYrjm2t9su7vqS0sTwcQj0izgfAR/sJwEA7zBmY8l2/BSeS4
 9bMHLhe6k/CEkIw5zjcteR97b/oLu98Hma649K0EwnYFyj4FjYng7BTkK/lRXD9aF2BM
 3krJdWjYL21Be1Bb5PqmeHFWhqFqcGFPUMo0AsKYIXakVUsjn2N7WVkjdVBYERvrzlmz
 KwUA==
X-Received: by 10.60.96.129 with SMTP id ds1mr35328348oeb.43.1410874485228;
 Tue, 16 Sep 2014 06:34:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.76.24.132 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 06:34:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201409161014.s8GAE77Z070671@freefall.freebsd.org>
References: <201409161014.s8GAE77Z070671@freefall.freebsd.org>
From: n j <nino80@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 15:34:25 +0200
Message-ID: <CALf6cgY7M6cQ+ODRGhnupz+NmM8H5f2CDPpFaiJT4kcQqTE2uw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security Advisory FreeBSD-SA-14:19.tcp
To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18-1
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
 <freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 13:34:46 -0000

Hi,

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 12:14 PM, FreeBSD Security Advisories <
security-advisories@freebsd.org> wrote:

> IV.  Workaround
>
> It is possible to defend against these attacks with stateful traffic
> inspection using a firewall.  This can be done by enabling pf(4) on
> the system and creating states for every connection.  Even a default
> ruleset to allow all traffic would be sufficient to mitigate this
> issue.
>

Any chance of getting more information in Workaround section? Is the
workaround applicable only to pf or IPFW also helps? Perhaps an example
rule?


> VII. References
>
> <URL:http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2004-0230>
>

2004? Wow, that's an old one.

Thanks,
-- 
Nino