Re: NT DoS on FW-1

From: Malikai (malikaiat_private)
Date: Mon Feb 15 1999 - 12:52:21 PST

  • Next message: Dave G.: "Re: KSR[T] Advisory #10: mSQL ServerStats"

    This issue can be fixed by simply implementing a stealthing rule on the
    firewall itself. The problem is in NT's stack, not the FireWalls.
    
    > Jamie Thain wrote:
    >
    > > Timothy,
    > >
    > > > I was running nmap against a client's Checkpoint FW-1
    > > > when they called to inform me that it had crashed.  I
    > > > was not on site so unfortunately I have little
    > > > details.
    > >
    > > I have seen this befor where a high speed port scanner running against
    a
    > > FW-1 on NT seems to crash it. FW-1 does not exhibit this behaviour on
    > > Sun. You may want to check and make sure you have the most recent
    patch
    > > level. That information is on the FW-1 site.
    > >
    > > > I DO know that they were running it on a NT
    > > > box and it was behind a Cisco 3640.
    > >
    > > Since they are running this behind a Cisco, why not do something
    > > creative like install and access list on the external interface to
    help
    > > protect the FW-1. Suppose for example, you have the following
    situation.
    > >
    > > fw-1 external interface         209.111.222.10
    > > work stations hide behind               .12.
    > > the SMTP server is on                   .50
    > > and the WEB server is on                .50
    > >
    > > ( port translated to diff machines )
    > > You use an external mail relay at the ISP at 192.167.10.1 and You use
    > > for DNS servers on the same network as the SMTP as forwarders in a
    split
    > > horizion.
    > >
    > > On the inbound interface of your cisco you could add the following.
    > > Cisco does not allow for these comments, they are just there to help.
    > >
    > > # short cut established packetes
    > > access-list 101 permit ip any 209.111.222.0 0.0.0.255 established
    > >
    > > # prevent non-routed address, anti-spoofing
    > > access-list 101 deny ip any 10.0.0.0     0.255.255.255
    > > access-list 101 deny ip any 172.16.0.0   0.15.255.255
    > > access-list 101 deny ip any 192.168.0.0  0.0.255.255
    > >
    > > # allow high ports
    > > access-list 101 permit tcp any 209.111.222.0 0.0.0.255 gt 1023
    > >
    > > # allow web service and email. Note the email is to the relay.
    > > access-list 101 permit tcp any host 209.111.222.50 eq http
    > > access-list 101 permit tcp host 192.167.10.1 host 209.111.222.50 eq
    smtp
    > >
    > > # only allow udp to the network with the DNS on it
    > > access-list 101 permit udp 209.111.222.0 0.0.0.255 192.167.10.1
    > > 0.0.0.255
    > >
    > > # don't allow ping (echo) to any port but the smtp/http server
    > > # people are funny if they can't ping the hosts...
    > >
    > > access-list 101 permit icmp any host 209.111.222.50 eq echo
    > > access-list 101 deny icmp any any eq echo
    > > access-list 101 permit icmp any any
    > >
    > > # only allow access to 12 and 50 in any case.
    > >
    > > access-list 101 permit ip any host 209.111.222.12
    > > access-list 101 permit ip any host 209.111.222.50
    > >
    > > interface serial0.1 point-to-point
    > >         ip address 209.111.221.252
    > >         no ip directed-broadcast
    > >         ip access-group 101 in
    > >
    > > # And on the inbound access list, I normally put a set that only
    allows
    > > # the two interesting interfaces out...
    > >
    > > access-list 103 permit ip host 209.111.222.12 any
    > > access-list 103 permit ip host 209.111.222.50 any
    > >
    > > interface ethernet0
    > >         ip address 209.111.222.254
    > >         no ip directed-broadcast
    > >         ip access-group 103 in
    > >
    > > This of course does not prevent a DOS attack against your FW-1, but it
    > > does make attacking it much more difficult. It also has some good
    > > things, because the only interfaces that can be accessed are virtual
    > > numbers and not the real interface of cards. Also by overloading a
    > > single address and doing port translation, for all of your inbound
    > > services lets your write far simpler rules in the router.
    > >
    > > There is no ping requests to any address on any address including the
    > > router and FW-1. Of course the only down-side is nmap recognizes that
    > > this is Firewalled because of all of the rejects going out. So you
    might
    > > want to suppress all outbound unreachables on the serial interface. I
    > > think that would fix it.
    > >
    > > Even if you are not this agressive, your router can add a good layer
    of
    > > security by just chucking stupid scanner requests. I hope CISCO comes
    up
    > > with a DROP for there access list.
    > >
    > > The flags that go red in your FW-1 have additional meaning as most of
    > > the crap is gone now...
    > >
    > > regards:jamie
    > >
    > > PLEASE NOTE::: This access list was typed directly from my head, and
    you
    > > would need to
    > > test it before using it...
    >
    
    
    
    
     Jason Ihde					malikaiat_private
     Networked Systems Consultant     &		Internet Systems Security
     PGP Key available via finger or http://interactivealien.com/~malikai/pgp
     	Experience is what you get when you don't get what you want.
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Apr 13 2001 - 14:35:06 PDT