Searched hist:132510 (Results 1 - 2 of 2) sorted by relevance

/freebsd-9.3-release/sbin/ipfw/
H A Dipfw.8diff 132510 Wed Jul 21 17:55:14 MDT 2004 andre Extend versrcreach by checking against the rt_flags for RTF_REJECT and
RTF_BLACKHOLE as well.

To quote the submitter:

The uRPF loose-check implementation by the industry vendors, at least on Cisco
and possibly Juniper, will fail the check if the route of the source address
is pointed to Null0 (on Juniper, discard or reject route). What this means is,
even if uRPF Loose-check finds the route, if the route is pointed to blackhole,
uRPF loose-check must fail. This allows people to utilize uRPF loose-check mode
as a pseudo-packet-firewall without using any manual filtering configuration --
one can simply inject a IGP or BGP prefix with next-hop set to a static route
that directs to null/discard facility. This results in uRPF Loose-check failing
on all packets with source addresses that are within the range of the nullroute.

Submitted by: James Jun <james@towardex.com>
/freebsd-9.3-release/sys/netpfil/ipfw/
H A Dip_fw2.cdiff 132510 Wed Jul 21 17:55:14 MDT 2004 andre Extend versrcreach by checking against the rt_flags for RTF_REJECT and
RTF_BLACKHOLE as well.

To quote the submitter:

The uRPF loose-check implementation by the industry vendors, at least on Cisco
and possibly Juniper, will fail the check if the route of the source address
is pointed to Null0 (on Juniper, discard or reject route). What this means is,
even if uRPF Loose-check finds the route, if the route is pointed to blackhole,
uRPF loose-check must fail. This allows people to utilize uRPF loose-check mode
as a pseudo-packet-firewall without using any manual filtering configuration --
one can simply inject a IGP or BGP prefix with next-hop set to a static route
that directs to null/discard facility. This results in uRPF Loose-check failing
on all packets with source addresses that are within the range of the nullroute.

Submitted by: James Jun <james@towardex.com>

Completed in 199 milliseconds