RE: Packets from 255.255.255.255(80) (was: Packet from port 80 wi th spoofed microsoft.com ip)

From: Tom Arseneault (TArseneaultat_private)
Date: Mon Feb 03 2003 - 11:22:36 PST

  • Next message: james: "Re: DoS Attacks, Detecting the Source, and Service Providers"

    The RFC's also state that you don't send ICMP messages in responce to other
    ICMP messages (at least as far as error messages go, you don't send a host
    unreachable message in response to an echo packet, though you would send a
    echo reply).
    
    Tom Arseneault
    Security Engineer
    Counterpane Internet Security.
    "All humans are born Right-Handed...but the great ones overcome it."
     
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Tomasz Papszun [mailto:tomek-incidat_private]
    Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 12:11 PM
    To: Peter Triller
    Cc: incidentsat_private
    Subject: Re: Packets from 255.255.255.255(80) (was: Packet from port 80
    with spoofed microsoft.com ip)
    
    <===SNIP===>
    
    These ICMP packets try to travel to... 255.255.255.255! Would'n it cause
    a multiplying?
    I know that a router/firewall may be configured to _not_ send "ICMP
    unreachables" but default is to send them.
    
    BTW, I seem to remember that _not_ sending "ICMP unreachables" is
    somehow against RFC...  Of course security reasons for not sending them
    may be important (e.g. for hiding some network devices) but
    _formally_... it's a little not good :-) .
    
    <===SNIP===>
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service.
    For more information on this free incident handling, management 
    and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Feb 04 2003 - 10:53:13 PST